01_benchmark - us and netherlands
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
1/174
TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE AND
SERVICES IN THE NETHERLANDS
A benchmark study for the Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and
Water Management, Directorate-General for Telecommunications and Post
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
2/174
TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES
IN THE NETHERLANDS
A benchmark study for the Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water
Management, Directorate-General for Telecommunications and Post
Frans van den Dool, Verdonck, Klooster & Associates
Chris Lewis, the Yankee Group Europe
Peter Horsten, Verdonck, Klooster & Associates
7 December 2000
Status Final
Version 1.0
Copyright 2000 Verdonck, Klooster & Associates B.V. and the Yankee Group Europe.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
3/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study ii
Contents
Presented Graphs v
Presented Tables vii
Summary and conclusions 1
The challenge 1
Scope of the study 1
The ambitions of the Cabinet are partly reached 2
Role Played by the Government 2
Recommendations 6
Samenvatting en conclusies 9
De uitdaging 9
Afbakening van de studie 9
De ambitie van het Kabinet wordt ten dele bereikt 10
Rol van de overheid 11
Aanbevelingen 15
1 Introduction 19
1.1 Rationale 19
1.2 This report 19
1.3 Disclaimer 20
2 Fixed Telephony 21
2.1 Introduction 21
2.2 Services 21
2.3 Innovation 32
2.4 Competition 34
2.5 Infrastructure 36
2.6 Regulatory Implications 36
3 Mobile telephony 39
3.1 Introduction 39
3.2 Mobile Voice Services 40
3.3 SMS and WAP Services 48
3.4 Innovation 54
3.5 Competition 58
3.6 Infrastructure 62
3.7 Regulatory Implications 62
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
4/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study iii
4 The Internet 65
4.1 Introduction 65
4.2 Services 66
4.3 Innovation 72
4.4 Competition 74
4.5 Infrastructure 76
4.6 Regulatory Implications 77
5 Leased lines and access networks 79
5.1 Introduction 79
5.2 Leased line services 79
5.3 Access services 82
5.4 Innovation 88
5.5 Competition and Infrastructure 91
5.6 Regulatory implications 92
6 Television and Radio 95
6.1 Introduction 95
6.2 Services 95
6.3 Innovation 97
6.4 Competition 98
6.5 Infrastructure 99
6.6 Regulatory Implications 100
7 Convergence 103
7.1 The Advent of the Multi-Service Infrastructure 103
7.2 Converging industries 104
7.3 Early convergence manifestations 107
7.4 Regulatory implications 108
8 Country comparisons 113
8.1 Introduction 113
8.2 Services 1138.3 Level of innovation 115
8.4 Competition 121
8.5 Infrastructure 126
8.6 Regulatory aspects 127
8.7 Lessons to be learned, important aspects for the regulator 130
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
5/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study iv
A Country profiles 133
A.1 The Netherlands 133
A.2 France 137
A.3 Germany 141
A.4 Sweden 145
A.5 UK 148
A.6 United States 153
B Methodology 160
B.1 Currency 160
B.2 General Demographics 161
B.3 Fixed Telephony 161
B.4 Fixed-to-mobile price comparisons 162
B.5 Mobile telephony 162
B.6 Pricing baskets 162
B.7 SMS messages costing 162
B.8 The Internet 162
B.9 Pricing baskets 162
B.10 Herfindahl-Hirschman Index 162
B.11 Reallocated Generic Top Level domain names 163
B.12 Leased lines and data services 163
B.13 TV and Radio 163
B.14 Convergence 163
B.15 Country Comparisons 163
C Glossary 164
D Data set 166
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
6/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study v
Presented Graphs
Figure 0-1: Innovation index overview (VKA, 2000).................................................................................... 3
Figure 0-2: Competitive index (VKA, 2000)................................................................................................. 4Figure 2-1: Changes in yearly costs for different usage profiles (OPTA, 2000)......................................24
Figure 2-2: National PSTN basket for residential customers, based on incumbent tariffs (OPTA, 2000)
.................................................................................................................................................. 24
Figure 2-3: National PSTN basket for business customers, based on incumbents tariffs (OPTA, 2000)
.................................................................................................................................................. 25
Figure 2-4: Price development (OPTA, 2000)........................................................................................... 25
Figure 2-5: Fixed to mobile prices for 3 mins at differing times (Tarifica, November 2000) ................... 27
Figure 2-6: Residential fixed telephony total access channels/household, including PSTN lines, cable
lines and ISDN channels (YGE, 2000)................................................................................... 28
Figure 2-7: Business fixed telephony access channels/employee, including analogue (PSTN) lines,
and ISDN (in terms of channels) (YGE, 2000).......................................................................28
Figure 2-8: Terminating costs per call peak tariff, incumbent's network (Analysys, 2000)..................30
Figure 2-9: Terminating costs per minute peak tariff, incumbent's network (Analysys, 2000)............31
Figure 2-10: Best case scenario for calculating the price gap (OPTA, 2000) ........................................... 32
Figure 2-11: Worst case scenario for calculating the price gap (OPTA, 2000)......................................... 32
Figure 2-12: Incumbents market shares, PSTN and ISDN, % of market revenue, end 1999 (IDC, 2000)
.................................................................................................................................................. 35
Figure 2-13: Active service providers (1999) compared to resellers (EU, YGE, 2000) ............................ 35
Figure 3-1: Western European cellular market forecast (YGE, 2000).....................................................39
Figure 3-2: Customer Satisfaction with Mobile Phone Service, by Region (YGE, 2000) .......................41
Figure 3-3: Customer Satisfaction with Telecommunications Services (YGE, 2000) ............................. 41
Figure 3-4: Factors Influencing Choice of Service Provider (YGE, 2000)............................................... 42
Figure 3-5: Mobile Services Retail Price Comparison for European Countries (YGE, 2000).................43
Figure 3-6: Mobile penetration in subscribers/inhabitants (YGE, June 2000)......................................... 46
Figure 3-7: Amount of business subscriptions per country (YGE, June 2000) ....................................... 47
Figure 3-8: Mobile Service Average Revenue per User (average for 1999, YGE, 2000).......................47
Figure 3-9: SMS Price Comparison in between the benchmark countries (YGE, September 2000)..... 49
Figure 3-10: SMS usage among Benelux mobile phone users and the average for Europe as a whole
(YGE, 2000) ............................................................................................................................. 50
Figure 3-11: WAP Penetration in relation to total subscriptions (YGE, June 2000).................................. 52
Figure 3-12: Mobile Operator Market Share Distribution (YGE, mid 2000)...............................................59
Figure 3-13: Percentage of customers who churned last year (YGE, 2000 estimate).............................. 60
Figure 3-14: Proportionate subscribers in domestic and Foreign market (YGE, 2000)............................61
Figure 4-1: Number of Domains per 1000 People (Zook, University of Calofornia, January 2000)....... 67
Figure 4-2: Internet costs per country for different consumer profiles (OECD Local Access Pricing and
E-Commerce Report, July 2000) ............................................................................................ 68
Figure 4-3: Internet costs per country for different business profiles (Teligen Study: International
Benchmarking Study of Telecommunication Services, May 2000 and YGE 2000)............. 69
Figure 4-4: Residential Household Internet Access Penetration Rate (YGE, 1999)............................... 70
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
7/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study vi
Figure 4-5: The number of 64 kilobit per second leased line equivalents per thousand employees
(YGE, 2000) ............................................................................................................................. 72
Figure 4-6: The number of secure servers per million inhabitants (OECD Local Access Pricing and E-
commerce Report, July 2000)................................................................................................. 73
Figure 4-7: The EIU e-business readiness ranking (ebusinessforum.com, May 2000).......................... 73
Figure 4-8: The number of reallocated generic top level domain names as a percentage of the number
of country domains plus the number of reallocated top level domain names (OECD Local
Access Pricing and E-commerce Report, July 2000) ............................................................74
Figure 4-9: The Herfindahl-Hirschman index for the Internet service provider dial-up Internet access
markets calculated using Internet service providers with a market share of 5% or more
(YGE, 2000) ............................................................................................................................. 75
Figure 4-10: The forecast Internet access method for households in 2001 .............................................. 76
Figure 5-1: Price for 2Mbit/s leased lines for 100km, in Euros (YGE, 2000)........................................... 81
Figure 5-2: Number of 64 kbps equivalents per 1,000 employees, October 2000 (YGE)......................81
Figure 5-3: Unbundled access prices in Euros per month (YGE, 2000).................................................. 83
Figure 5-4: Residential Penetration of Cable Modems (Subscriptions/Total Households)
(YGE, end 1999) ...................................................................................................................... 84
Figure 5-5: Penetration of Residential ADSL (Subscriptions/Total Households) in Year-end 1999 ...... 85
Figure 5-6: Residential ISDN Penetration, ISDN channels/Total Households (YGE, Year end 1999).. 87
Figure 5-7: Percentage of fibre kilometres owned by competition to the incumbent (YGE, 2000) ........ 92
Figure 6-1: Average spend per customer in Euros per month (Baskerville: Western European TV,
December 1999) ...................................................................................................................... 96
Figure 6-2: Number of TV sets per household per country (YGE, 2000) ................................................ 96
Figure 6-3: Number of digital CATV subscriptions related to the total CATV number (YGE, 2000).... 100
Figure 7-1: Multi-service suppliers (YGE, 2000)..................................................................................... 105
Figure 7-2: The deconstruction of the former PTTs (YGE, 2000).......................................................... 107
Figure 7-3: The future progression of bandwidth usage (YGE, 2000)................................................... 109
Figure 7-4: Balancing the dominant players against the new entrants (YGE, 2000)............................ 110
Figure 8-1: Price ranking for the Netherlands (VKA, 2000).................................................................... 114
Figure 8-2: Availability ranking for the Netherlands (VKA, 2000)........................................................... 115
Figure 8-3: Fixed telephony innovation index (VKA, 2000).................................................................... 116
Figure 8-4: Mobile innovation index (VKA, 2000) ................................................................................... 117
Figure 8-5: Internet innovation index (VKA, 2000).................................................................................. 118
Figure 8-6: Leased line innovation index (VKA, 2000) ........................................................................... 119Figure 8-7: TV and radio innovation index (VKA, 2000)......................................................................... 120
Figure 8-8: Overview innovation index (VKA, 2000)............................................................................... 121
Figure 8-9: Competitive index .................................................................................................................. 123
Figure 8-10: Combined market shares of the incumbents (YGE, 2000).................................................. 124
Figure 8-11: Incumbents shares held by the private sector (YGE, 2000)................................................ 125
Figure 8-12: Estimated investment levels for the Dutch market (OPTA, 2000) ...................................... 125
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
8/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study vii
Presented Tables
Table 2-1: Examples of US quality statistics (FCC Service Quality Report, 1998)................................21
Table 2-2: Example of BT Operator services quality statistics (BT Agency Operator Statistics webpage www.btinterconnect.com/qos/opqual.htm)....................................................................22
Table 2-3: Overview of KPN quality statistics in percentages (KPN, 2000)........................................... 23
Table 2-4: US Access services provided to carriers - switched access; a sample of statistics available
(FCC Service Quality Report, 1998)....................................................................................... 29
Table 2-5: Indicators for innovation (YGE, 2000) .................................................................................... 34
Table 3-1: Indication of the influence of roaming costs (YGE, 2000).....................................................44
Table 3-2: Summary of Mobile Service Innovations and Leading Countries (YGE, 2000) ................... 57
Table 4-1: Average Ping Time in Milliseconds for Internet Traffic from Selected Regions to Selected
Countries, October 2000 (The PingER Project, Stanford University) ................................... 67
Table 4-2: The Key Drivers For US Internet Growth (YGE, 2000).......................................................... 71
Table 4-3: Market Share of ISPs (Number of Subscribers) (YGE, October 2000) ................................75
Table 5-1: Leased circuits lead times, October 2000 (YGE)................................................................... 80
Table 5-2: Homes passed for 2-way infrastructure month (Baskerville: Western European TV,
December 1999) ...................................................................................................................... 85
Table 5-3: Status of WLL licensing (YGE, 2000)..................................................................................... 90
Table 6-1: Penetration of CATV and satellite services (Vecai Study: Broadband Monitor, Cable &
Satellite Yearbook, 2000) ........................................................................................................ 97
Table 6-2: Number of suppliers offering innovative services (YGE, October 2000) ..............................97
Table 6-3: Number of competitive operators (YGE, 1999)...................................................................... 99
Table 8-1: Fixed telephony innovation indicators (VKA, 2000)............................................................. 116
Table 8-2: Mobile telephony innovation indicators (VKA, 2000)........................................................... 117
Table 8-3: Internet services innovation indicators (VKA, 2000)............................................................ 118
Table 8-4: Leased Lines services innovation indicators (VKA, 2000) .................................................. 119
Table 8-5: Television and radio innovation indicators (VKA, 2000)...................................................... 120
Table 8-6: Level of competition indicators per service (VKA, 2000)..................................................... 122
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
9/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
1
Summary and conclusions
The challenge
The Dutch government has set herself the objective to develop the 'ICT-environment' as well as
possible. Therefore, the underlying (tele)communications infrastructure which should facilitate this
objective is one of the five pillars the government has defined. The Ministry of Transport, Public
Works and Water Management has been challenged to let an affordable, accessible and reliable
telecommunications infrastructure develop. To keep up with the development of this infrastructure
and to observe possible bottlenecks the Ministry has commissioned a benchmark study.
This report presents the results of the benchmark study conducted in the year 2000 and reviews the
situation of the (tele) communications services and infrastructure in the Netherlands compared with
the following benchmark countries: France, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom (UK), and the
United States (US). A number of comparisons are based on 1999 data, because more recent
comparable data was not available at the publishing date of the report.
Scope of the study
In the benchmark study the telecommunications situation in the Netherlands is compared with five
benchmark countries. The objectives set in the white paper "The Digital Delta" are evaluated.
These objectives are:
1. The cabinet seeks to ensure a first-class, affordable, accessibleand reliable
(tele)communications infrastructure.
2. The role to be played by the government here is to encourage innovation and investmentinthe telecommunications infrastructure by:
a) assuring competitionin the telecommunications market;
b) allocating frequency spaceefficiently; and
c) safeguarding the technical reliabilityof the telecommunications infrastructure.
The scope of this benchmark study, however, is somewhat broader than infrastructure alone. Now,
one year after publishing "The Digital Delta" we can see that infrastructure can not be treated on its
own any longer. Today, it is becoming increasingly important to study the services using the
infrastructure. For a very long time a service was more or less linked with one kind of infrastructure,
but that is no longer the fact anymore. Telephony can be delivered via fixed and mobileinfrastructures, but also using cable TV networks. In the near future also IP-telephony will become
mainstream according to the opinion of the authors. TV and radio do no longer depend on the
traditional ether and cable TV networks. Again the introduction of IP-technology, i.e. the Internet,
has created a new distribution channel for these signals.
Another reason to broaden the scope of the study is the fact that infrastructures are used for
different service mixes in different countries so it is difficult to compare them in an effective way on
this aspect alone. In our view, a better starting point is an evaluation of the telecommunication
services that are provided to customers, and in the evaluation take into account the various
infrastructures that are used to support these services.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
10/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
2
This document presents the findings and conclusions of the benchmark study of
telecommunications infrastructure and services in the Netherlands for the Dutch Ministry of
Transport, Public Works and Water Management, Directorate-General for Telecommunications and
Post, conducted in joined effort by the Yankee Group Europe (YGE) and Verdonck, Klooster &
Associates (VKA).
The findings and conclusions are primarily the opinion of the authors of this report and do not
necessarily represent the opinion of the Ministry.
The ambitions of the Cabinet are partly reached
First class and reliable infrastructure
There is very little systematic monitoring of quality of service indicators by the different countries,
and this makes it hard to monitor the effective achievement of universal access and affordability.
Also in the Netherlands there is no regular publication of independently verified indicators. It is clearthat such a publication would improve both competition and consumer choice.
Affordability
From the information provided in the report, we can conclude that the Netherlands compares
favourably with the other countries, except for leased line services. For this latter service the
Netherlands is the most expensive of all the countries considered.
Accessibility
Accessibility is determined by the extent that a service is available in the market. Except for
television and radio, which have a very good availability because of the ubiquitous cable TV (CATV)
networks, the Netherlands score in the middle range for most services when compared to the other
countries. For leased line services the comparison is less favourable. This is probably partly caused
by the high prices that have to be paid for these services, but also because of long delivery times
and limited competition in this area. Although in the Netherlands there is a growing number of
suppliers with a national infrastructure of their own, it is still difficult for them to reach the end user
with their own network.
Role Played by the Government
Innovation and Investment
Germany and Sweden are good performers with respect to innovation with the exception of leased
lines for Sweden. The Netherlands is weaker than most in three areas: fixed telephony, television
and radio and leased lines. The common denominators for the low performance in these areas are
the late licensing (WLL1, DAB
2and DTT
3) and the late and inadequate introduction of local loop
unbundling (LLU)
1Wireless Local Loop
2Digital Audio Broadcast3Digital Terrestrial Transmission for Television
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
11/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
3
0102030405060
708090
100
Nethe
rland
s
Fran
ce
Germ
any
Swed
en UK
USA
Fixed telephonyinnovation index
Mobile telephony
innovation indexInternet InnovationIndex
Leased linesinnovation index
Television and radioinnovation index
Figure 0-1: Innovation index overview (VKA, 2000)
For the different service categories the following conclusions can be drawn:
In general innovation in fixed telephony is not very high; it is a mature market and the
performance of the countries does not differ very much. The most important aspects are new
service packages and tariff structures that have been given a high weighting. The Netherlands
is not performing as well as the other countries. This is primarily caused by the relatively late
introduction of these new features and late regulatory measures.
The market for mobile is very dynamic. Some governments such as the U.K., Germany and the
Netherlands have been fast to react to the new possibilities for 3G. In the first two countries this
has also led to an early introduction of GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) technology. The
Netherlands is performing well because of speedy introduction of number portability, UMTSlicensing and a relatively high penetration of mobile phones.
The Internet is of course an exciting domain for the development of new services. However,
because of the open and international character of the Internet, services are less and less
country specific and are, therefore, not a distinguishing factor for indicating differences in
innovation. This trend is amplified by the concentration and internationalisation of ISP's world-
wide. In Europe, The Netherlands, Sweden and Germany are performing well because of the
high Internet penetration and relatively high uptake of DSL4. The new services identified do not
seem to vary much between the different countries.
Leased lines are not very exciting in terms of innovation. The introduction of new services,
which would be a key indicator for innovation, is not occurring on the supply side. Nearly all
new service developments, with respect to bandwidth services, are occurring in the IP domain.
The Netherlands and Sweden are bad performers primarily because of the lack of WLL
licenses and relatively low bandwidth usage per employee. In the Netherlands this may be
caused by the high cost of bandwidth.
The Netherlands score very low for television and radio services. This is partly because
licensing for DAB and DTT is taking a long time, and partly because new services are difficult
to introduce, because of the low costs for numerous TV and radio channels of good (technical)
quality.
4Digital Subscriber Line: a new transmission technology for the local loop to enable high speed digital
transmission
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
12/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
4
In the authors view, stimulating new entrants to deploy new infrastructure is the best way to
increase innovation. Early licensing of frequencies stimulates the deployment of infrastructure and
hence leads to improvement of the competitive and innovation situation. By further increasing the
spectrum available for telecommunication services the level of innovation can be built upon.
No comparable data on investment levels are available for the different countries. There is,
however, some indication about the investment growth in the Netherlands. This seems to indicate
that with the increasing competition there is also a considerable increase in investments is taking
place.
Assuring competition
The competition for fixed telephony does not differ very much in the countries considered as is
shown in the figure below. The markets are becoming more similar as the Netherlands, Germanyand France are catching up with early stimulators of competition, the UK and Sweden.
The authors conclude that competition is limited in all countries. The incumbents still retain a large
share of the market. In the Netherlands and Sweden the low "price gap", the difference between
retail and interconnection tariffs, may be partly responsible for limiting the competition for national
telephony. A comparison with the US is difficult to make because of the differences per state. But
also there is a limited competition on the state level. International and national telephony is a highly
competitive market, dominated by three suppliers. At the moment these suppliers are losing even
more market share because of an increasing (price) competition.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Neth
erlan
ds
Fran
ce
Ger
man
y
Swed
en UK
USA
Fixed telephony
Mobile telephony
Leased Lines
Internet
Figure 0-2: Competitive index (VKA, 2000)
Also in mobile the markets are not that very different. Competition is strongest in the UK. In the tariff
comparisons the Netherlands show the best performance, closely followed by Sweden and the UK.
The authors observe that it will not be long before competition is no longer determined at the
national level. Especially the mobile operators are transforming into pan-European and even world
wide players. A limited number of major players will dominate this market. From the comparison
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
13/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
5
with those players it is clear that KPN Mobile will have a modest position on the European and
world wide level.
For Internet services there is a considerable difference between the countries. The US is the best
performer with respect to competition. The U.K. is following the U.S. at some distance with the
other countries even further behind. In the Netherlands, Germany and France competition is still
limited because of the large market shares of the incumbents KPN (Het Net, Planet Internet,
XS4ALL), France Telecom (Wanadoo) and Deutsche telecom (T-online).
For leased lines the situation in the benchmark countries differs significantly. Sweden is a good
performer on both price ranking and availability of competitive fibre. All other countries are
performing badly on both elements, with the Netherlands scoring very negatively on leased line
pricing.
In the authors view, early licensing, in particular, is stimulating the development of both competition
and innovation. Encouraging new entrants to deploy new infrastructure is another measure that can
be used to accomplish development in these areas. This is clearly illustrated by the market situation
in the mobile environment where in the Netherlands five competing infrastructures have been
deployed.
For the residential area, however, it is not reasonable to expect that new entrants will deploy a new
local network to offer fixed services. Cable TV networks are a viable alternative local infrastructure,
in particular where they are not owned or controlled by the incumbent. The Netherlands was earlier
than most other countries to separate CATV activities from the incumbents service offering. In the
Netherlands cable television penetration is as high as that of the voice telephony network, and
voice telephony via cable is actually being offered, be it on a limited scale. It has proven difficult
however to offer voice telephony via the cable in a cost-effective way.
The introduction of Carrier Select and Carrier Preselect has not resulted in extensive new
investments in infrastructure in the Netherlands. Most service providers connect to the KPN
network at the double tandem (national) level. The effects of a price squeeze (low margin between
interconnect and retail tariffs), especially for interconnection at the local and single tandem level,
may be partly to blame for this. The price gap in the Netherlands is low compared with other
countries as price levels have been decreasing considerably the last two years. Finally, Local LoopUnbundling (LLU) may be a good way to increase investments in competition in infrastructure and
services. However, fair pricing and conditions for collocation are crucial for the success of this new
access arrangement.
Besides tight control on pricing for interconnection and LLU, we would suggest that pressure on
retail prices by OPTA could be relieved to make it more attractive for new players to come into the
market.
In the business market there is already a level of competition, especially for bandwidth services
larger than 2 Mbit/s. Competing infrastructures are available from a number of players. However,
the competitive situation in the Netherlands as a whole is not developing favourably, with thehighest prices of all benchmark countries. There are areas where competition is virtually non-
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
14/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
6
existent and waiting times of over a year regularly occur. This is very much dependent on the
dominance of KPN Telecom in the last mile. In our opinion, the creation of more competition should
be given priority.
Allocating frequency space efficiently
Although fairly early with the licensing of UMTS frequencies, the Netherlands has lagged behind in
other licensing areas (WLL, DAB and DTT). The authors view the delay in licensing as a restraint
on the market and would suggest action to speed up the process.
Safeguarding the technical reliability
Except for the "Nationale Noodnet" no special measures have been taken by government to
safeguard the technical reliability. A policy paper has been published, but this does not contain any
concrete measures.
Recommendations
Quality
To increase the insight in the quality of the telecommunications service levels in the Netherlands we
advice stimulating self-regulation by service providers and user organisations. In the authors
opinion this is the most effective way for regulators to increase transparency in the market.
However, in case of failure to install a quality monitoring and reporting facility, it is recommended
that OPTA forces at least the dominant players to publish their performance.
Pricing
Pricing will be a difficult area to regulate. The traditional cost-based pricing rules currently imposed
on incumbent suppliers will need to be re-adjusted to cover the anticipated developments in voice
services, such as flat rate tariffing and the inclusion of voice in a package of other services. This will
be a problem throughout Europe and will need to involve parties at EU-level.
Pricing and conditions for Local Loop Unbundling are critical. At present, pricing is causing
controversy between NRA's and incumbent operators in most countries. Prices still seem to be on
the high side. To stimulate competition at local level and deployment of infrastructure, a strict price
control is imperative.
The price gap in the Netherlands is low compared with other countries. The effects of a price
squeeze (low margin between interconnect and retail tariffs), especially for interconnection at the
local and single tandem level, may be inhibiting interconnection on these levels and, therefore,
introducing a barrier for infrastructure development. We would suggest that OPTA could relieve
pressure on prices to make it more attractive for new players to come into the market.
Stimulate infrastructure development
According to the Telecommunications Act every public telecommunications operator has digging
rights to lay cables in the ground. However, in practice, in many city areas there are severelimitations, long waiting times and cost penalties to actually deploy physical infrastructure. Also in
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
15/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
7
specific areas there are inhibitors for new entrants to establish telecom sites, such as unfavourable
local tax conditions and shortages in electricity supply. In our view, local authorities should be
called to account when local regulations are not consistent with national policies and regulations. A
further investigation into the limitations operators are facing and how they can be improved, is
recommended. A further recommendation to the Dutch Ministry is that alternative carriers should be
encouraged, possibly by tax incentives, to continue to compete in fibre kilometres and not become
complacent. Also the national and local government can stimulate competitive fibre infrastructures
by own initiatives like digging tubes if ground works are taking place or stimulation of fibre projects
with multiple operators.
Licensing WLL frequencies and stimulating their use are important in increasing competition. Also
the licensing for DAB and DTT has been delayed and should come into effect as soon as possible.
Stimulating innovation
In the authors view stimulating new entrants to deploy new infrastructure is the best way to
increase innovation. Also in this respect early licensing is an important instrument. By further
increasing the spectrum available for telecommunication services the level of innovation can also
be improved.
Leave mobile market alone
As both innovation and competition are developing well in the mobile services market a low level of
intervention in this market is recommended. However, it is important to keep a watch on the
developments, and a review of possible anti-competitive behaviour is still necessary, in view of the
large market shares of the two dominant players in the market.
Convergence
The existing framework for regulating the different industries of telecommunications, broadcasting
and even general commercial activities, will have to be brought under a single, or certainly
integrated, regulatory umbrella. Since this convergence is a relatively recent development, no
country has achieved a truly integrated regulatory framework. However, within the European
Commission discussion about the future regulatory framework of electronic communications is
already taking place. If a fully integrated framework is not developed, it will leave significant
confusion. For example, Voice over IP could escape regulation, since many of its proponents will
not come under the telephony regulation.
NRA competence
In general, competition is developing in the right direction be it at a slow pace. Given the dominance
of the incumbents and the dependence of new entrants on the incumbents infrastructure we think
that it is too early to hand over jurisdiction to a generic supervisor. There are many examples in the
different countries considered where the incumbent is not co-operating in creating the desirable
level of competition. Furthermore, new entrants are faced with high costs for use of the incumbents
infrastructure, and vigilance is necessary from a regulatory authority that can act as a countervailing
power for the incumbents knowledge surplus over the new entrants.
In view of the success in the U.K., it might be worth considering increasing the competencies of
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
16/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
8
OPTA. At present, OPTA can only act after a complaint is filed by a market party, a lengthy and
costly process for the company involved. The effectiveness of the NRA is improved if, like OFTEL in
the U.K., it is allowed to act pro-actively.
However, in the authors view this should be embedded in a framework where the tasks and
responsibilities of OPTA have been clearly defined. To get a better alignment of short term and long
term objectives for the development of the telecommunications market, a closer collaboration
between DGTP and OPTA is necessary. This will become feasible when the involvement of the
state in KPN is cut back to a much lower level.
Dealing with the increasing internationalisation of players
For all service categories we expect an increasing concentration and internationalisation. Also
multi-national companies will increasingly make deals on a corporate level. This makes it more and
more difficult to consider the telecommunications situation on a national level. This developmentcalls for an increased co-operation between NRAs. The "high level" group of NRAs could play a
role in advising the European Commission. The European Commission provides the regulatory
framework and formulates the questions for the "high level" group when appropriate.
Safeguarding the technical reliability
Society is becoming increasingly dependent on telecommunications services and facilities. That is
why it is crucial for telecommunications services to function with a high level of reliability and
security. Some countries have taken measures to ensure continuity in transmission networks and
the networks and services of important telecom operators. In our view, a good first step to come to
a more co-ordinated approach in the Netherlands is to start consultations between DGTP andinfrastructure providers to stimulate and align continuity planning as suggested in the Nacotel policy
paper5.
5Nationaal Continu teitsplan Telecommunicatie, Version 1.0, August 2000
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
17/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
9
Samenvatting en conclusies
De uitdaging
De Nederlandse overheid heeft zich tot doel gesteld om het 'ICT-landschap' in Nederland zo goed
mogelijk te ontwikkelen. De onderliggende (tele)communicatie-infrastructuur die dit mogelijk moet
maken is daartoe n van de vijf hoofdpijlers die de overheid heeft gedefinieerd. Het Ministerie van
Verkeer en Waterstaat heeft de uitdaging toebedeeld gekregen om een betaalbare, toegankelijke
en betrouwbare telecommunicatie-infrastructuur te doen ontstaan. Om de ontwikkeling van deze
infrastructuur te kunnen volgen en eventuele knelpunten te signaleren heeft het Ministerie van
Verkeer & Waterstaat een benchmarkstudie uit laten voeren.
Het voorliggende rapport beschrijft de bevindingen van deze benchmarkstudie uitgevoerd in het
jaar 2000 waarin de telecommunicatie-ontwikkelingen in Nederland vergeleken zijn met de
ontwikkelingen in Duitsland, Frankrijk, het Verenigd Koninkrijk, de Verenigde Staten en Zweden.
Een aantal vergelijkingen is gebaseerd op informatie uit 1999, omdat actuelere informatie (nog) niet
beschikbaar was op het moment van publiceren.
Afbakening van de studie
In deze benchmarkstudie is de telecommunicatiesituatie in Nederland vergeleken met vijf
benchmarklanden. De doelstellingen uit "De Digitale Delta"6zijn hierbij gevalueerd. Deze
doelstellingen zijn:
1. Het is de ambitie van het Kabinet om een eersteklas, betaalbare, toegankelijkeen
betrouwbare(tele)communicatie-infrastructuur te realiseren.2. De rol van de overheid hierbij is:
a) Het stimuleren van innovatie, concurrentie en investeringenin de (tele)communicatie-
infrastructuur.
b) Het efficint alloceren van frequentieruimte.
c) Het bewaken van de technische betrouwbaarheidvan de (tele)communicatie-
infrastructuur.
Deze benchmarkstudie heeft zich echter niet uitsluitend beperkt tot de infrastructuur. Nu, ruim een
jaar na het verschijnen van "De Digitale Delta" valt te constateren dat de infrastructuur niet langer
alles bepalend is. In toenemende mate wordt het ook van belang om de diensten die over dediverse infrastructuren worden geleverd apart te bestuderen. Lange tijd was een dienst vast
verbonden met een infrastructuur, maar inmiddels is dit een achterhaald feit. Telefonie wordt
geleverd via vaste en mobiele infrastructuren, maar inmiddels ook via kabel TV (CATV) netwerken.
In de nabije toekomst wordt ook IP-telefonie7naar de verwachting van de auteurs gemeengoed. TV
en radio zijn ook niet langer gebonden aan de traditionele ether- en kabelnetwerken. Ook hier blijkt
6Brief van de Ministers van Economische Zaken, Grote Steden- en Integratiebeleid en Justitie en de
Staatssecretarissen van Verkeer en Waterstaat, Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschappen en Financin van 1
juli 1999, Kamerstukken II, 26 643, nr. 17IP is het Internet Protocol. Overigens wordt met IP-telefonie niet bedoeld dat telefonie via het openbare
Internet op korte termijn mogelijk is. Hier wordt met name gedoeld op 'besloten' IP-netwerken.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
18/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
10
de introductie van IP-technologie, in de vorm van het Internet, een nieuw transportkanaal voor deze
signalen mogelijk te maken.
Een andere reden dat de studie zich niet tot uitsluitend de infrastructuur heeft beperkt is het feit dat
in de diverse landen de diverse infrastructuren gebruikt worden voor diverse samenstellingen van
diensten. Hierdoor is het moeilijk om ze op een goede wijze voor dit enkele aspect met elkaar te
vergelijken.
Dit rapport geeft de bevindingen en conclusies weer van de benchmarkstudie van de
telecommunicatie-infrastructuur en diensten in Nederland. Dit onderzoek is door the Yankee
Group Europe (YGE) en Verdonck, Klooster & Associates (VKA) uitgevoerd in opdracht van het
Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat, Directoraat Generaal Telecommunicatie en Post.
De bevindingen en conclusies zoals verwoord in dit rapport zijn primair de opinie van de schrijvers
en representeren niet per definitie de mening van het Ministerie.
De ambitie van het Kabinet wordt ten dele bereikt
Eersteklas en betrouwbare infrastructuur
De kwaliteit van de infrastructuur en de diensten is vrijwel onvergelijkbaar tussen de
benchmarklanden. In zeer beperkte mate wordt er systematisch gerapporteerd over de kwaliteit in
de diverse landen. Dit maakt het tevens gecompliceerder om te onderzoeken of de doelstellingen
voor toegankelijkheid en betaalbaarheid worden bereikt. Ook in Nederland is geen reguliere
rapportage beschikbaar met onafhankelijk geverifieerde indicatoren. Het is duidelijk dat een
dergelijke rapportage de concurrentie en consumenten keuze zou kunnen bevorderen.
Betaalbaarheid
Uit de benchmarkstudie blijkt dat Nederland voor wat betreft de kosten goed uit de vergelijking met
de andere landen komt. Dit geldt voor alle diensten, behalve voor vaste verbindingen. Hiervoor is
Nederland namelijk het duurste land.
Toegankelijkheid
De toegankelijkheid is bepaald aan de hand van de mate waarin diensten in de markt verkrijgbaar
zijn. Behalve voor televisie en radio, die zeer toegankelijk zijn door de overal aanwezige CATV
netwerken, scoort Nederland gemiddeld vergeleken met de andere landen. Opnieuw is de situatie
voor vaste verbindingen het slechtst, mogelijk onder andere vanwege de hoge kosten, maar vooral
ook door de lange levertijden en de beperkte concurrentie op dit terrein. Hoewel er in Nederland in
toenemende mate partijen zijn met een eigen landelijke infrastructuur, lukt het deze partijen (nog)
niet om de eindgebruiker ook via het eigen netwerk te bereiken.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
19/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
11
Rol van de overheid
Innovatie en investeringen
Duitsland en Zweden presteren goed ten aanzien van de innovatie, met uitzondering van de dienstvaste verbindingen in Zweden. Nederland presteert hier minder dan de overige benchmarklanden
voor vaste telefonie, televisie en radio en vaste verbindingen. Een overeenkomstige verklaring voor
deze slechte prestatie is het laat vrijgeven van frequenties (WLL8, DAB
9en DTT
10) en de late en de
beperkte introductie van ontbundelde toegang (ULL11
).
01020304050
60708090
100
Nethe
rland
s
Fran
ce
Germ
any
Swed
en UK
USA
Fixed telephonyinnovation index
Mobile telephonyinnovation index
Internet InnovationIndex
Leased linesinnovation index
Television and radioinnovation index
Figuur 0-1: Overzicht van de innovatie-index (VKA, 2000)
Voor de diverse service categorien kunnen de volgende conclusies worden getrokken:
Over het algemeen is de innovatie voor vaste telefonie beperkt; het is een volwassen markt en
de prestaties van de landen liggen redelijk dicht bij elkaar. De belangrijkste vernieuwingen zijn
nieuwe 'gebundelde' dienstenpakketten en tariefstructuren. Nederland presteert hier slechter
dan de meeste andere benchmarklanden vanwege de relatief late introductie van dergelijke
vernieuwingen en verlate regelgeving.
De mobiele communicatie markt is erg dynamisch. Enkele overheden zoals in Duitsland, het
Verenigd Koninkrijk en Nederland hebben snel gereageerd op de nieuwe mogelijkheden van
3G, de derde generatie van mobiele communicatie. In de eerste twee landen heeft dit er onder
meer toe geleid dat GPRS-technologie12
snel is ge ntroduceerd. Nederland presteert hier onder
andere goed door de snelle introductie van nummer portabiliteit, het uitgeven van UMTS-
licenties en de relatief hoge penetratie van mobiele telefoons.
Het Internet is vanzelfsprekend een spannende omgeving voor de ontwikkeling van nieuwe
diensten. Vanwege het open en internationale karakter van het Internet zijn diensten echter
steeds minder landen specifiek. Hierdoor is het geen onderscheidende factor meer waarmee
8Wireless Local Loop
9Digital Audio Broadcast
10Digital Terrestrial Transmission for Television
11Unbundled Local Loop: ontbundelde toegang, waardoor concurrenten van de voormalige PTT toegang krijgt
tot de koperdraad die de gebruiker met de wijkcentrale verbindt.12
General Packet Radio Service
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
20/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
12
verschillen in innovatie kunnen worden aangegeven. Deze trend wordt versterkt door de
wereldwijde concentratie en internationalisatie van Internet Service Providers (ISPs). In Europa
presteren met name Nederalnd, Zweden en Duitsland erg goed vanwege de hoge Internet
penetratie en de relatief snelle toename van DSL-technologie13
.
De diensten voor vaste verbindingen blijken weinig innovatief. Vrijwel alle nieuwe
ontwikkelingen betreffende bandbreedte diensten vinden plaats in het IP-domein. Aan de
aanbiederszijde ontstaan dus geen nieuwe diensten voor vaste verbindingen, terwijl dit wel de
belangrijkste indicator voor innovatie is. Nederland en Zweden presteren, met name door het
ontbreken van WLL-licenties en het relatief lage verbruik van bandbreedte per medewerker,
slecht op dit punt. In Nederland kan dit veroorzaakt worden door de hoge kosten voor en de
beperkte beschikbaarheid van vaste verbindingen.
Nederland presteert slecht op het gebied van televisie en radio diensten. Deels wordt dit
veroorzaakt door het feit dat de uitgifte van licenties voor DAB en DTT lang duurt. Ook wordt dit
veroorzaakt door het feit dat nieuwe diensten moeilijk ge ntroduceerd kunnen worden door de
extreem lage kosten voor een groot aantal TV- en radiokanalen met een goede (technische)
kwaliteit.
Volgens de auteurs is het stimuleren van de uitrol van nieuwe infrastructuren door nieuwe
aanbieders de beste manier om de innovatiekracht in Nederland toe te laten nemen. Vroegtijdige
uitgifte van frequentie licenties stimuleert de ontwikkeling van alternatieve infrastructuren en dat
leidt tot verbetering van de concurrentie positie en innovativiteit. Door het beschikbare spectrum
voor telecommunicatiediensten verder uit te breiden kan het innovatie niveau verder worden
verbeterd.
Helaas hebben de auteurs geconstateerd dat er geen vergelijkbare (recente) informatie
voorhanden is om het investeringsniveau in de diverse landen te vergelijken. Wel is er informatie
beschikbaar voor de Nederlandse markt, waaruit blijkt dat de toenemende concurrentie ook leidt tot
een aanzienlijke toename van de investeringen in telecommunicatie-infrastructuren en -diensten.
Stimuleren van concurrentie
Het verschil ten aanzien van de concurrentie voor vaste telefonie tussen de benchmarklanden is
beperkt, zoals ook blijkt uit onderstaande figuur. In feite worden de markten in de diverse landen
meer en meer vergelijkbaar omdat Nederland, Duitsland en Frankrijk de voorlopers, het Verenigd
Koninkrijk en Zweden, in beginnen te halen. Wel merken de auteurs op dat in alle landen deconcurrentie feitelijk erg beperkt is. De voormalige PTTs hebben in alle landen nog het grootste
gedeelte van het telefonieverkeer in handen. In Nederland en Zweden lijkt met name de beperkte
'price gap', het verschil tussen het retail- en interconnectietarief, de concurrentie voor het nationale
telefonieverkeer te beperken. Een vergelijking met de Verenigde Staten op dit punt is moeilijk te
maken vanwege de grote verschillen tussen de staten. Hoewel ook hier valt te constateren dat de
'nationale' telecommarkt (binnen een staat) beperkt concurrerend is. Met name de communicatie
internationaal en tussen de staten onderling kan worden gezien als een sterk concurrerende markt
13Digital Subscriber Line: Het toepassen van een nieuwe technologie waardoor de telefoonlijn ook geschikt
wordt gemaakt voor (breedbandig) datatransport.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
21/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
13
die wordt gedomineerd door drie partijen. Momenteel zijn deze partijen echter marktaandeel aan
het verliezen door een sterk toenemende (prijs)concurrentie.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
NetherlandsFrance Germany Sweden
UK USA
Fixed telephony
Mobile telephony
Leased Lines
Internet
Figuur 0-2: Concurrentie-index (VKA, 2000)
Ook de mobiele communicatiemarkten verschillen niet veel meer. De concurrentie is het sterkst in
het Verenigd Koninkrijk. Kijkend naar de tarieven is Nederland het meest concurrerend, op korte
afstand gevolgd door Zweden en het Verenigd Koninkrijk. De auteurs merken op dat het niet lang
meer zal duren voordat de concurrentie niet meer op nationale schaal zal worden bepaald. Juist de
mobiele operators krijgen door fusies en overnames in hoog tempo een pan-Europees en zelfs
internationaal karakter. Een beperkt aantal grote spelers gaat deze markt domineren. Uit eenvergelijking met deze spelers blijkt dat KPN Mobiel een bescheiden positie heeft op Europees en
wereldniveau.
Een groot verschil tussen de diverse landen valt waar te nemen voor wat betreft Internet diensten.
Hier presteren de Verenigde Staten duidelijk beter dan de andere benchmarklanden. Op enige
afstand volgt het Verenigd Koninkrijk en de andere landen volgen op nog grotere afstand. In
Nederland, Duitsland en Frankrijk is de concurrentie nog steeds beperkt door het grote aandeel van
de voormalige PTTs KPN (Het Net, Planet Internet, XS4ALL), France Telecom (Wanadoo) en
Deutsche Telecom (T-Online).
De concurrentie voor leased lines verschilt behoorlijk in de diverse benchmarklanden. Zweden
presteert erg goed zowel op het gebied van prijs als voor de beschikbaarheid van concurrerende
glasvezelinfrastructuren. De overige landen presteren voor beide punten erg slecht, waarbij
Nederland er met name ten aanzien van prijs erg negatief uitspringt.
Naar de mening van de auteurs stimuleert met name het vroegtijdig beschikbaar stellen van
licenties zowel de concurrentie als de innovatie. Het stimuleren van nieuwe toetreders om een
nieuwe infrastructuur aan te leggen is een middel om ontwikkelingen op deze terreinen te
realiseren. Dit blijkt duidelijk uit de markt situatie voor mobiele communicatie waarvoor in Nederland
vijf concurrerende infrastructuren zijn aangelegd.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
22/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
14
Voor de residentile markt valt redelijkerwijs echter niet te verwachten dat nieuwe toetreders een
nieuw lokaal netwerk aan gaan leggen voor het bieden van 'vaste' diensten. Kabel TV netwerken
vormen redelijkerwijs een alternatieve infrastructuur, vooral wanneer de voormalige PTT deze niet
bezit of beheerst. Nederland heeft eerder dan andere landen de kabel TV activiteiten afgescheiden
van het dienstenportfolio van KPN. Daarnaast is de kabelpenetratie in Nederland vrijwel net zo
hoog als de telefoniepenetratie. Inmiddels wordt kabeltelefonie op beperkte schaal geboden, maar
in de praktijk is gebleken dat het moeizaam is om via de kabel op een kosten effectieve manier
telefonie aan te bieden.
De introductie van Carrier Select (CS) en Carrier Preselect (CPS) hebben niet geleid tot grote
investeringen in infrastructuur in Nederland. Blijkbaar kiezen nieuwe toetreders vooralsnog voor het
eenvoudige model van interconnectie op nationaal niveau en gebruiken de infrastructuur van KPN
voor het afhandelen van het nationale verkeer. Het merendeel van de aanbieders interconnecteert
met het KPN-netwerk op nationaal niveau. Het effect van de price squeeze (lage marge tussen het
interconnectie- en retailtarief) op met name het locale of 'single tandem' niveau, kan hiervoor deels
een verklaring zijn. Dit verschil is namelijk erg klein in Nederland in vergelijking met de
benchmarklanden, omdat de retailtarieven zo sterk zijn gedaald. Voor de aanbieders betekent dit
dus een steeds kleiner wordende marge. Tenslotte zou de ontbundeling van de local loop een
goede manier kunnen zijn om de concurrerende investeringen in infrastructuren en diensten te
stimuleren. Voor het succes van deze nieuwe toegangsmogelijkhied is het echter wel van belang
dat de tarieven en condities voor collocatie redelijk zijn. Tevens is nauwlettend toezicht op de
prijzen voor interconnectie en LLU gewenst, waarbij de auteurs voorstellen dat OPTA niet langer
streeft om de retailprijzen te verlagen, zodat het aantrekkelijker wordt voor nieuwe toetreders tot de
telecommunicatiemarkt.
Binnen de zakelijke markt is in toenemende mate sprake van concurrentie, met name voor
bandbreedte diensten boven 2 Mbit/s. Concurrerende infrastructuren zijn beschikbaar. De
concurrentie positie in Nederland ontwikkelt zich echter niet goed, met name gezien de hoge
tarieven ten opzichte van de benchmarklanden. Er zijn gebieden waar feitelijk geen concurrentie is
en levertijden van meer dan een jaar zijn veelvoorkomend. Volgens de auteurs wordt dit in
belangrijke mate veroorzaakt door de dominantie van KPN voor wat betreft de locale netwerken
(last mile). Het creren van meer concurrentie op dit terrein moet volgens de auteurs hoge prioriteit
worden gegeven.
Het efficint alloceren van frequentieruimte
Hoewel Nederland relatief snel was met het uitgeven van de UMTS-frequenties, loopt Nederland
achter bij de uitgifte van andere licenties (WLL, DAB en DTT). De auteurs zien deze vertraagde
uitgifte als een belemmering voor de markt en stellen dan ook voor om dit proces te versnellen.
Het bewaken van de technische infrastructuur
Behalve het "Nationale Noodnet" zijn er in Nederland geen speciale maatregelen genomen door de
overheid om de technische betrouwbaarheid van de infrastructuur te garanderen. Een beleidsnotitie
over dit onderwerp is gepubliceerd maar dit bevat geen enkele concrete indicator.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
23/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
15
Aanbevelingen
Kwaliteit
Om de kwaliteit van de telecommunicatiedienstverlening in Nederland beter inzichtelijk te maken,adviseren wij om aan te sturen op zelfregulering door de markt. Dit zien de auteurs als de meest
effectieve manier voor de regelgever om de markttransparantie te verhogen. Echter, in het geval dit
niet tot het gewenste kwaliteitsregistratie en rapportage systeem mocht leiden, dan adviseren wij
dat OPTA ten minste de aanmerkelijk marktpartijen dwingt om informatie over hun prestaties te
publiceren.
Prijs
De tariefstelling van de diensten is een moeilijk terrein voor regulering. De traditionele regels voor
kostengeorinteerde tarieven zoals deze nu op worden gelegd aan de voormalige PTT's zullen
moeten worden aangepast aan de hedendaagse ontwikkelingen als flat rate tarifering en het
bundelen van telefonie met toegevoegde waarde diensten. Overigens zal dit een probleem worden
binnen heel Europa en daarom zullen partijen op EU-niveau hierbij betrokken moeten worden.
De tarieven en voorwaarden voor ontbundelde toegang zijn kritische voorwaarden voor
concurrentie. Op dit moment veroorzaakt deze tarifering in de meeste landen discussie tussen de
toezichthouder en de voormalige PTT's. De prijzen lijken nog steeds aan de hoge kant te zijn. Om
de concurrentie op lokaal niveau te stimuleren tezamen met een verdere ontwikkeling van
infrastructuren, is een strikte prijscontrole noodzakelijk.
De zogenaamde 'price gap' is in Nederland erg laag vergeleken met andere landen. Het effect van
een 'price squeeze', met name voor interconnectie op lokaal en single tandem niveau, kan
interconnectie op dit niveau belemmerd worden. Daardoor vormt dit een barrire voor infrastructuur
ontwikkeling. De auteurs adviseren OPTA om de minder druk uit te oefenen op het verlagen van de
retailprijzen, zodat het aantrekkelijker wordt voor nieuwe toetreders tot de markt.
Stimuleer infrastructuur ontwikkeling
Op basis van de Telecommunicatiewet heeft iedere publieke telecommunicatie operator het recht
om kabelinfrastructuur aan te leggen. Echter, in de praktijk blijkt dat er in diverse stedelijke
gebieden forse belemmeringen, lange wachttijden voor graafvergunningen en hoge kosten zijn
voordat een netwerk kan worden aangelegd. Ook zijn er in specifieke gebieden belemmeringen
voor toetreders om een telecom site te realiseren, zoals bijvoorbeeld locale onroerend goed
belastingen en tekorten in de energievoorziening. Naar onze mening dienen locale autoriteiten er
op aan te worden gesproken als zij niet voldoen aan nationale beleidsuitgangspunten en
regelgeving. De auteurs adviseren een nader onderzoek uit te voeren naar de beperkingen die
operators ervaren en hoe deze situatie verbeterd kan worden. Tevens adviseren de auteurs om
concurrerende aanbieders te stimuleren, wellicht met belastingvoordelen, om te blijven concurreren
middels eigen (glasvezel)infrastructuren. Ook kan door de nationale en lokale overheden
overwogen worden om zelf het initiatief te nemen om de juiste voorwaarden te scheppen voor
concurrerende operators, die het aanleggen van glasvezelverbindingen aanzienlijk voordeliger
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
24/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
16
kunnen maken, hierbij valt te denken aan het leggen van buizen op trajecten waar
grondwerkzaamheden plaatsvinden of het stimuleren van 'samenleg' projecten.
Het uitgeven van WLL frequenties en het stimuleren van het gebruik hiervan is naar de mening van
de auteurs erg belangrijk voor een toename van de concurrentie. Ook de uitgifte van DAB- en DTT-
licenties is vertraagd en het advies is om deze uitgifte zo snel mogelijk te laten plaatsvinden.
Stimuleren van innovatie
Naar de mening van de auteurs is het stimuleren van de uitrol van infrastructuren door nieuwe
toetreders de beste methode om de innovatie te stimuleren. Ook hierbij is dus het vroeg uitgeven
van licenties een belangrijk instrument. Het beschikbaar stellen van nieuwe frequentieruimte
(spectrum) kan daarbij nog een extra stimulans zijn.
Laat de mobiele markt losOmdat zowel de innovatie als de concurrentie zich goed ontwikkelen binnen de mobiele sector,
adviseren de auteurs zeer beperkt in te grijpen in deze markt. Wel blijft het belangrijk om de
ontwikkelingen te volgen en evaluatie van mogelijk concurrentie beperkend gedrag blijft
noodzakelijk, zeker gezien de grote marktaandelen van de twee dominante spelers.
Convergentie
Het bestaande kader waarop regelgeving voor de diverse (tele)communicatie- en
omroepindustrien en zelfs algemene commercile activiteiten gebaseerd is, zal onder een enkele
of minimaal een meer ge ntegreerde regelgevende 'paraplu' gebracht moeten worden. Omdat
convergentie nog maar een relatief nieuwe ontwikkeling is, heeft nog geen enkel benchmarkland
een echt volledig ge ntegreerd regelgevend kader. Binnen de Europese Commissie vindt echter al
wel een discussie plaats over een toekomstig regelgevend kader voor elektronische communicatie.
Als een volledig ge ntegreerd kader niet wordt ontwikkeld, dan zal dit resulteren in aanzienlijke
verwarring. Voice over IP zou in een dergelijk geval de huidige regelgeving ontlopen omdat dit niet
onder de telefonie regelgeving valt.
Competentie van de toezichthouder
Over het algemeen ontwikkelt de concurrentie zich in de goede richting al gaat het in bepaalde
gevallen wel langzaam. Gegeven de dominantie van de voormalige PTT's en de afhankelijkheid
van de infrastructuur van deze voormalige PTT's voor nieuwe toetreders zijn de auteurs van
mening dat het te vroeg is om het toezicht op de telecommunicatie markt over te dragen aan een
meer algemene toezichthouder. Er zijn vele voorbeelden in de verschillende landen waarbij de
voormalige PTT niet meewerkt aan het realiseren van het gewenste concurrentie niveau.
Daarnaast worden nieuwe toetreders geconfronteerd met hoge kosten om de infrastructuur van de
voormalige PTT te gebruiken. Tevens is de oplettendheid van een regelgevende autoriteit gewenst
die als gelijkwaardige tegenspeler van de goed ge nformeerde voormalige PTT kan dienen.
Vanwege het succes in het Verenigd Koninkrijk valt te overwegen om de bevoegdheden van OPTA
toe te laten nemen. Momenteel kan OPTA alleen acteren na het indienen van een klacht door een
marktpartij; een langdurig en kostbaar proces voor de betrokken partij. De effectiviteit van de
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
25/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
17
toezichthouder neemt toe als het is toegestaan om pro-actief te handelen, zoals OFTEL in het
Verenigd Koninkrijk kan doen. Naar de mening van de auteurs moet deze uitbreiding van de
bevoegdheden wel worden ondergebracht in een kader waarbinnen de taken en
verantwoordelijkheden van OPTA duidelijk zijn gedefinieerd. Om een betere afstemming te
realiseren tussen de korte en lange termijn doelstellingen ten aanzien van de ontwikkeling van de
telecommunicatiemarkt, is een hechtere samenwerking tussen OPTA en DGTP noodzakelijk. Dit
wordt mogelijk als de betrokkenheid van de overheid in KPN is teruggebracht tot een lager niveau.
Toenemende internationalisatie van aanbieders
Voor alle dienstencategorien verwachten wij een toenemende concentratie en internationalisatie.
Daarbij zullen multi-nationals in toenemende mate overeenkomsten afsluiten op internationaal
niveau. Hierdoor wordt het steeds moeilijker om de telecommunicatie op nationaal niveau te
beoordelen. Deze ontwikkeling vraagt om een intensievere samenwerking tussen de diverse
nationale toezichthouders. De 'koplopers' van de toezichthouders zouden een rol kunnen vervullenals adviseur van de Europese Commissie. De Europese Commissie levert het regelgevend kader
en formuleert vragen voor de 'koploper' groep indien van toepassing.
Bewaken van de technische betrouwbaarheid
De maatschappij wordt in toenemende mate afhankelijke van telecommunicatiediensten en
faciliteiten. Daarom is het zo belangrijk dat telecommunicatiediensten geleverd worden met een
hoge mate van betrouwbaarheid en veiligheid. Enkele landen hebben maatregelen genomen om de
continu teit van infrastructuren en diensten van belangrijke telecommunicatie operators te
garanderen. In de optiek van de auteurs zou een consultatie van de infrastructuur aanbieders door
DGTP eerste goede stap zijn om tot een meer gecordineerde aanpak in Nederland te komen. Opdeze wijze kan de continu teit van de infrastructuren worden gestimuleerd en onderling afgestemd
worden, zoals is voorgesteld in het Nacotel beleidsdocument14
.
14
Nationaal Continu teitsplan Telecommunicatie, Versie 1.0, augustus 2000
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
26/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
18
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
27/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
19
1 Introduction
1.1 Rationale
In the Netherlands the cabinet wishes to establish a sound base for the further development of the
Netherlands into a "digital delta". In a white paper called "The Digital Delta"15
the
(tele)communications infrastructure is considered important as a basis for the further development of
the information society:
Specifically the cabinet seeks to ensure a first-class, affordable, accessible and reliable
(tele)communications infrastructure. The role to be played by the government here is to encourage
innovation and investment in the telecommunications infrastructure by assuring competition on the
telecommunications market, by allocating frequency space efficiently, and by safeguarding the
technical reliability of the telecommunications infrastructure.
At the time of writing the position of the Netherlands was considered favourable because of the
degree of liberalisation on the (tele)communications market and the opportunities offered by the
relatively dense national cabling system. An item of concern, however, was the fact that the rate at
which the capacity of the infrastructure was being expanded was lagging behind the rate at which
capacity demand among business and private users was increasing, above all due to the explosive
growth of the Internet - 100% a year in this country - and mobile traffic. At the same time the
potentials of the cable were still under-utilized.
One of the actions and activities of the cabinet announced in "The Digital Delta" was a periodical
benchmark of (tele)communications (services and) infrastructure, the first benchmark to be
conducted in 2000.
1.2 This report
This report presents the results of the benchmark study conducted in the year 2000 and reviews the
situation of the (tele)communications services and infrastructure in the Netherlands compared with
the following benchmark countries: France, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom (UK), and the
United States (US). The research was undertaken at the request of the Dutch Ministry of Transport,
Public Works and Water Management, Directorate-General for Telecommunications and Post.
In the report the key indicators for the progress of telecoms services and infrastructure in theNetherlands are identified and compared with the benchmark countries, and hence, what action can
be taken by the Dutch Ministry to provide an optimum environment for the economy to flourish.
15
The White Paper The Dutch Digital Delta, The Netherlands On-Line is a joint publication by the following
Dutch Ministries: the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, the Ministry
of Finance, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, and the Ministry of Transport,
Public Works and Water Management. Published June 1999.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
28/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
20
The report follows a sequence of major service and infrastructure issues. Starting with telephony,
divided into fixed telephony and mobile telephony chapters, then the Internet (which is both a
service and an IP infrastructure), followed by data services (including leased lines and broadband
access) and broadcast media (TV and radio) are discussed. The report is then completed with two
chapters covering wider horizons: the implications of converging service combinations on different
infrastructures, and a comparison of overall country markets.
The key conclusions and recommendations are illustrated by graphical data within the body of the
report but a mass of accompanying benchmark indicators are available to the Ministry as an
Appendix. In addition, the Appendix includes individual country profiles for each of the benchmark
countries as well as the Netherlands, the methodology and a glossary.
1.3 DisclaimerThe statements expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not represent the position of
The Dutch Ministry in any way.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
29/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
21
2 Fixed Telephony
2.1 Introduction
In general, in terms of quality, price and availability of fixed telephony services, the Netherlands
compares favourably with the benchmark countries in this study. However our conclusion is that with
the exception of international telephony, none of the countries considered have a really competitive
market for fixed telephony. Stimulating alternative access arrangements like Wireless Local Loop
and creating better conditions for the utilisation of Local Loop Unbundling (LLU) and Carrier
Preselect (CPS) are recommended as ways for improving the competition. Local Loop Unbundling is
possibly the most contentious area, where the Netherlands is not alone in having to overcome
operator conflicts.The issue of quality is possibly the least well covered since like most of Europe,
there are few indicators in the Netherlands. The recommendation is to set up a public register of
quality benchmarks and performance results of all the Dutch operators.
In pricing, the Netherlands would appear to be leading most of the benchmark countries at the
moment, but in this highly competitive area, vigilance must be maintained. It is recommended that,
looking ahead to the anticipated convergence and flattening of current price rates, there should be
considerable thought and discussions with operators in order to keep up with developments.
As for availability, the single most significant issue to stimulate the provision of services is probably
competition and this in turn will be greatly assisted by unbundling the local loop.
2.2 Services
2.2.1 Retail market
Quality
In most European countries very little information is available about the quality levels, and what is
revealed is typically not recent, nor consistent, nor comparable between countries. Even in the US,
which has an elaborate reporting system for performance indicators, the latest information at the
time of writing is for 1998 (from the FCC Service Quality Report 1998), see Table 2-1. In the UK,
some information is made available for fixed telephony, by some operators, e.g. BT publishes
performance indicators for its Operator and Emergency calls, see Table 2-2. Germany has specified
quality indicators but it only started collecting them from the beginning of this year (2000).
Company Ameritech Bell
Atlantic
BellSouth SBC US West Sprint GTE
Initial Trouble Reports per
Thousand Lines
216.9 172.6 286.5 189.8 196.0 240.7 201.9
Residence Complaints per Mill.
Residence Access Lines
182.5 201.9 144.3 52.1 722.4 125.1 131.3
Business Complaints per Mill.
Business Access Lines
73.1 69.8 40.9 18.6 338.8 59.2 127.6
Table 2-1: Examples of US quality statistics (FCC Service Quality Report, 1998)
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
30/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
22
Service Q1 (apr 99-jun 99) Q2 (jul 99 Sep 99)
Apr May Jun July Aug Sep
Operator Assistance
calls answered in 15
seconds
92.10% 87.94% 88.15% 90.75% 91.53% ---
Emergency calls
answered in 5 seconds
96.03% 96.71% 94.73% 95.25% 95.97% ----
Table 2-2: Example of BT Operator services quality statistics (BT Agency Operator Statistics
web page www.btinterconnect.com/qos/opqual.htm)
The quality statistics of KPN as shown in Table 2-3 lead to the conclusion that the quality perception
of the customers is decreasing. On the other hand other research shows that customers in the
Netherlands value quality of service as high. This is underpinned by customer surveys (Telecom
Monitor) and hence the provision of quality indicators could be a stimulation to usage and
competition.
The authors would suggest that stimulating self-regulation by service providers and user
organisations is the most effective way for regulators to increase transparency in the market.
However in case of failure to install a quality monitoring and reporting facility it is
recommended that OPTA forces at least the dominant players to publish their performance.
The necessary regulation is already in place because Art. 27 BOHT forces the dominant
players and all the other suppliers (active for 18 months already) of public fixed telephony to
report on a yearly basis. The parameters, definitions and measure methods are defined in
ONP 98/10EG.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
31/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
23
QUALITY 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Customer satisfaction with the
provision of products and services
Private customers 91 92 88 90 84 84
Business customers 87 82 73 74 66 54
Customer satisfaction with the way fault
reports are handled
Private customers 91 93 95 94 89 84
Business customers 92 90 93 92 90 85
Customer satisfaction with the way
faults are cleared
Private customers 86 88 94 90 91 89
Business customers 83 84 87 86 89 85
Customer satisfaction with the way
complaints are handled
69 82 83 80 75 71
Customer satisfaction with service for
telephone subscribers
Handling of applications for exchange lines 95 96 94 95 93 91
Provision of exchange lines 91 92 88 90 83 86
Handling of fault reports 90 93 95 93 90 84
Fault clearance 86 87 93 88 91 90
Performance of directory enquiries
(0900-8008)
Availability 96 94 95 96 94 97
Average waiting time (in seconds) 20 24 13 13 10 16
Friendliness of operators 99 99 99 99 99 99
Table 2-3: Overview of KPN quality statistics in percentages (KPN, 2000)
Price
In the Netherlands prices have been decreasing for some time now. In Figure 2-1 this trend is
visualised for callers with different usage patterns. It shows that with the exception of a caller with a
low usage patterns both in 1999 and in 2000 telephony has become cheaper. The heavy user and
small businesses are taking advantage the most of this development. The low usage caller is paying
more than 2 years ago, but is better of in 2000 compared to 1999.
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
32/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
24
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Low
usag
eca
ller
A
vera
geusa
gecalle
r
High
usu
gecalle
r
Intern
etus
er
Small
bus
iness
Euros/ye
ar
1-1-981-1-99
1-1-00
Figure 2-1: Changes in yearly costs for different usage profiles (OPTA, 2000)
Compared to other countries The Netherlands has low tariffs; it is the second lowest after Sweden,
but the Netherlands is a small and densely populated country so cost levels for the operators are
relatively low (Figure 2-2 and Figure 2-3,). For businesses however tariffs have been increasing in
the Netherlands. The reasons are partly that corporate discounts have decreased (an OPTA ruling),
and VAT has been increased. In France and Germany the effects of increasing competition are
visibly resulting in a (slight) decrease of price levels.
0,0
100,0
200,0
300,0
400,0
500,0
600,0
Neth
erlandFr
ance
Germ
anSw
ede UKUSA
Euro
1996
1998 3.Q.
1999 4.Q.
Figure 2-2: National PSTN basket for residential customers, based on incumbent tariffs
(OPTA, 2000)
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
33/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
25
0,0200,0400,0600,0800,0
1.000,01.200,01.400,0
Neth
erla
nd
Fran
ce
Ger
man
y
Swed
eU.
K.
U.S.
A.
1996
1998 3.Q.
1999 4.Q.
Figure 2-3: National PSTN basket for business customers, based on incumbents tariffs
(OPTA, 2000)
In Europe, tariffs are converging and simplifying while differences between countries have been
decreasing in the past two years. The markets in the various countries, with the exception of the US,
are becoming more similar as the Netherlands, Germany and France are catching up with early
stimulators of competition, the UK and Sweden. This is also illustrated by Figure 2-4 that clearly
indicates that tariff levels are converging.
0,0
50,0
100,0
150,0
200,0
250,0
300,0
350,0
400,0
450,0
1996 1998 3.Q. 1999 4.Q.
Netherlands
Germany
France
UK
Sweden
Figure 2-4: Price development (OPTA, 2000)
Pricing appears to be an increasingly competitive area, driven by the incumbent operators
desperately trying to stay ahead of the new and aggressive competitors, with new schemes and
innovative bundles of services being announced almost daily. In parallel, the traditional divisions
between peak and off-peak and between business and consumer usage patterns are being erodedby the Internet, by mobiles, and by bundling a certain level of time for voice calls as part of the
-
8/13/2019 01_benchmark - US and Netherlands
34/174
Final
Telecommunications infrastructure and services in The Netherlands
Benchmark study
26
monthly service charges. The result of the move to simplified and bundled pricing is that there
is a loss of transparency for the user (i.e. the user cannot compare different carriers so
easily!).
Incorporating low-end Value Added Voice Services (VAVS) into the basic package is a tactic now
adopted by France Telecom, which has just announced a restructuring of its residential subscription
offering. This has been raised by 0,61/month but now includes last number redial, call waiting,
three-way calling, voice mail, call barring and bill verification. The operator is clearly not expecting to
generate direct revenues from its VAVS bundle, but is taking pre-emptive steps to secure its
subscriber base before local loop unbundling starts to impact on the residential market.
France Telecom and other incumbents are aware that once competitive local operators are able to
access their customers directly there will follow a sharp fall in prices for access and call charges.
Offering free value-added services will likely become an increasingly common tactic and the
disappearance of charges for basic VAVS seems inevitable. While their main competition has come
from the more expensive mobile operators, established telcos have remained in a position to charge
users for services, which can be implemented at negligible cost. We can soon expect others to
follow FT with the introduction of free VAS as a means of winning and retaining customers.
There remains room for substantial growth in non-basic value-added voice services, although it is
not certain how readily consumers will respond to these higher priced, more advanced offerings.
Options such as call forwarding and personal numbering services are more likely to appeal to the
business market, which tends to be more responsive to added functionality as well as being less
price sensitive. However, the revenue-generating potential of these services even amongst
professional users has yet to be proven.
Hence, a price convergence is expected and it is recommended that this is planned for, in
discussions with the leading operators in The Netherlands. For the operator billing is also
increasingly becoming a dominant cost factor in itself. This in itself suggests further changes in tariff
structures, such as more distance-independent tariffs (as now introduced in Sweden), and the
emergence of free local calls. Local calls in US, which appear free to users since the charges are
included in a fixed