international traffic termination session 13b

InternationalTelecommunicationUnionOctober 2010 1

ITU workshop onInternational Roaming and

International Traffic Termination

Session 12: International Traffic Termination

Bangkok 5-8 October, 2010

David Rogerson

2

Agenda

Why is international termination different?Why is there a regulatory problem?Stakeholder viewpoints

OperatorsGovernmentsNational regulators

Approaches to regulation


Why is international termination different?

4

International traffic termination

International traffic termination allows subscribers in one country to receive calls from subscribers in other countries.International traffic termination applies to both fixed and mobile termination …although different charges may apply.

For the purpose of this presentation we focus on voice traffic but termination can also apply to text (SMS) and switched data services.

Typical call scenario

Y X

1. Caller pays retail IDD rate for call to Country Y

3. International operator in Country X pays termination rate in Country X

2. Operator from Country Y pays Int’l Settlement Rate to partner in Country X

NationalSwitch (NS)

Int’lGateway (IGW)

IGW

NS

The system is symmetrical

Y X

1. Caller pays retail IDD rate for call to Country X

3. International operator in Country Y pays termination rate in Country Y

2. Operator from Country X pays Int’l Settlement Rate to partner in Country Y

NS

IGW IGW

NS

7

Key principles of Int’l Accounting RatesDeveloped at a time of national monopolies and before mobile networks were establishedInitial settlement rates were (at best) loosely based on costs

They have failed to keep up with cost reductions caused by technology improvements and competition

Although the system appears symmetrical the money flows are from developed to developing countries:

Most traffic originates from rich countriesHigh settlement rates favour the recipient countries

Simple example: calls between two monopolies in Countries X and Y

Call type IDD rate Settlement rate

Revenue Operator X

Revenue Operator Y

From X to Y 22cpm 15cpm 7cpm 15cpm

From Y to X 20cpm 15cpm 15cpm 5cpm

8

Note:• Reciprocal settlement rate which covers costs and margin• Reciprocity usual but not necessary• Each operator controls profitability by setting IDD rates

Complication: competition lowers prices in country Y

Call type IDD rate Settlement rate

Revenue Operator X

Revenue Operator Y

From X to Y 22cpm 15cpm 7cpm 15cpm

From Y to X 16cpm 15cpm 15cpm 1cpm

9

Note:• Margins squeezed for operators in Country Y• Lower IDD prices increases the % of outbound traffic from Y to X, exacerbating the loss of margin• Country Y wants to reduce settlement rates.

10

Pressure to reduce Int’l Accounting RatesDeveloped countries, where competition increased fastest and costs fell fastest, wanted to lower settlement rates to protect operator profitsThe FCC in the 1990s imposed benchmarks on US carriers: rates above which they were prohibited from settling international payments. Developing countries saw inbound international calls as an important source of revenue and resisted the tide to lower settlement rates.

Complication: differential mobile termination rates make some calls

unprofitable Call type Settlement

rateTermination rate

Revenue for int’l operator

Inbound call to fixed

10cpm 2cpm 8cpm

Inbound call to mobile

10cpm 12cpm -2cpm

11

Note:• Affects countries where calling party pays is the norm for all calls (e.g. Europe)• Not an issue for countries where mobile party pays to receive calls (e.g. USA)

12

How to deal with international calls to mobile (in CPP countries)

The mobile operator could accepts a lower termination rate for international calls

But this encourages refile, where national calls are presented as if international, so as to obtain lower termination rate.Early revenue sharing schemes in Europe were abandoned as a result

Differential settlement rates, higher for mobile than for fixed

May allow all calls to be profitable, but increases complexity especially between RPP and CPP countriesSustainability requires rapid reduction in mobile termination rates.

Example of reciprocal, differentiated settlement rates

13

US EU

Mobile settlement = 10cpm

Fixed settlement = 2cpm

Unified settlement = 6cpm

Assumes 50/50 traffic split. Would need to be renegotiated if significantly different in practice.


Why is there a regulatory problem with international

termination?

15

National regulatory objectivesThe NRA is charged with looking after the national economic interestsWill lower settlement rates be in the national interests?

Consumers will benefit from lower international calling charges Operators and Government may prefer the higher rates that brings in hard currency and can fund investment.

Where the balance of traffic is heavily in favour of inbound international calls, it is hard to regulate settlement rates down.

The benefits of cost-based settlement rates will largely be experienced by consumers in other countries.

16

Lack of regulatory independence: government objectives may trump regulator’s objectives

Regulator’s objectives

Government’s objectives

The regulatory balance

17


Stakeholder perspectives

19

Stakeholders in international roaming

20

Brainstorm of key issues for each stakeholder group


Approaches to regulation

Approach 1: Hold back the tide

Maintain high settlement rates as long as possibleRequires monopoly / government control of international gatewayVoIP should be banned to limit bypassHard to sustain in the face of international pressure, trade agreements, technology change etc

Example - monopoly international gateway

Country XInternational

IGW Provider (incumbent)

Mobile 2

Mobile 1

Fixed 2

7cpm

18cpm

15cpm

Numbers are indicative. Each operator sets its own termination rates.

10cpm (Fixed)18cpm (Mobile 1)21cpm (Mobile 2)

Approach 2: Controlled evolution

Accept that international settlement rates are going to fall towards cost-based levels but seek a gradual changeVarious methods of achieving this e.g:

Prohibition on transit trafficRegulated glidepath

Example - Prohibition on transit traffic


IGW Provider (incumbent)

Mobile 2

Mobile 1

Fixed 2

7cpm

18cpm

15cpm

Numbers are indicative. Only larger operators can negotiate direct international connectivity

10cpm (Fixed)18cpm (Mobile 1)21cpm (Mobile 2)

Example – regulated glide-path

X

IGW

National POI 8cpm

14cpm

1412

108

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

US

cent

s pe

r m

inut

e

2010 2011 2012 2013

International termination rates as at 1 January

National termination rates much below internationalIGW-POI transit costs close to zeroGlide-path removes difference over several years

Approach 3: Let the market decide

Introduce competition in national and international servicesAllow transit of incoming international callsCharges for terminating international calls are gradually reduced to similar level to national call termination.

Liberalised international traffic

Any operator can enter this market so long as it can negotiate an agreement with an international partnerThe ability to handle traffic destined for another network potentially allows smaller operators to achieve sufficient scale to enter this market Margins are competed away because of the transit capabilityHigh price elasticity of demand – international operators will switch traffic in bulk between national termination partners based on small price differentials.

Liberalised market outcomes - initial


IGW provider

Mobile 2

Mobile 1

Fixed 2

3cpm

7cpm

7cpm

Numbers are indicative. Termination rates are the same as for national calls. Transit operator retains a small margin.

6cpm (Fixed)10cpm (Mobile)




3cpm 3cpm

3cpm

Liberalised market outcomes – long term


IGW provider

Mobile 2

Mobile 1

Fixed 2

1cpm

1cpm

1cpm

Numbers are indicative. Termination rates are the same as for national calls. Transit operator retains a small margin.

1.5cpm

1.5cpm

1.5cpm

1.5cpm

1cpm 1cpm

1cpm

A possible regulatory strategy


Thank you.

In the final session we will look at a case study with role play on

international traffic termination

international traffic termination session 13b

Technology

intl settlement rate

based settlement rates

initial settlement rates

idd rates

reciprocal settlement

lower termination rate

countries x

lowersettlement rates