Euro-telcos call on big tech to help pay for their network builds
- Reference: 1638252970
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/11/30/european_telecommunications_network_operators_association_letter/
- Source link:
The [1]letter , signed by the CEOs of the Vodafone Group, BT Group, Deutsche Telekom, Telefónica, Orange Group and five more telco leaders, calls for a "renewed effort to rebalance the relationship between global technology giants and the European digital ecosystem".
"A large and increasing part of network traffic is generated and monetized by Big Tech platforms, but it requires continuous, intensive network investment and planning by the telecommunications sector," the letter states, adding "This model – which enables EU citizens to enjoy the fruits of the digital transformation – can only be sustainable if such platforms also contribute fairly to network costs."
[2]
The letter also calls for "Strong political buy-in to ensure that regulatory action fosters investment in gigabit networks, which will require €300bn additional investment". Again, the context is "telecom operators compete face-to-face with services by big tech". And Big Tech does not pay for spectrum or need to comply with the numerous laws binding carriers. Or, often, pay tax.
[3]Nextcloud and cloud chums fire off competition complaint to the EU over Microsoft bundling OneDrive with Windows
[4]Billion-dollar US broadband bonanza awaits Biden's blessing – what you need to know
[5]Biden order calls for net neutrality, antitrust action, ISP competition – and right to repair your own damn phone
Carriers everywhere have never quite been able to reconcile why they have so spectacularly failed at upselling customers to the kind of services that provide rivers of gold for Netflix, Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Spotify, and other tech giants.
The idea that Big Tech profits from carriers, and should therefore help telcos build their networks, therefore pops up from to time without ever getting much more traction than [6]South Korea's efforts to have Netflix pay mobile carriers for all the traffic its videos create.
[7]
Netflix has told South Korea it thinks providing ISPs with a bandwidth-saving content delivery network is a fair contribution, and seems willing to see what the courts think of that argument.
Big Tech almost always ignores telcos' calls for co-investment in networks, with one exception: Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and Amazon have all invested in submarine cables to haul their data across oceans. Doing so can save them money because they also reserve some capacity on those cables, avoiding future transit charges. Examples of such generosity to landlubbing carriers is harder to find.
[8]
The ten signatories to this letter have wrapped themselves in the European flag, citing their role in pursuing the EU Digital Decade targets and therefore contributing to the advancement of the European economy. Even climate change gets a mention: the carriers quote data suggesting wider technology adoption could trim CO 2 emissions by 15 per cent.
At the time of writing, Big Tech and regulators are yet to respond to the letter. The Register will follow the story in case their ripostes are newsworthy. ®
Get our [9]Tech Resources
[1] https://etno.eu/news/all-news/717-ceo-statement-2021.html
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YaYEYHOYDUjixKYDYy@PLwAAANY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2021/11/29/onedrive_antitrust/
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2021/11/10/us_broadband_infrastructure/
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/09/biden_executive_order/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2021/11/08/netflix_south_korea_network_use_fees_dispute/
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YaYEYHOYDUjixKYDYy@PLwAAANY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YaYEYHOYDUjixKYDYy@PLwAAANY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: telcos vs big data
Without the cables and radio masts, they can know anything they want, but if people can't connect to their services, they are dead in the water...
Surely all this indicates is that the Telecos aren't charging enough for access to their data networks.
After all, part of the fee people pay to telecos, for access to their networks, is meant to be for maintenance and improvements, isn't it?
no... wait...
It's simply a move to hope to get a slice of the cake to fatten dividends and bonuses, while trying to kill off competition from smaller ISPs - how could OTTs pay every ISP in the world? And how money should be shared? They would make deals with the larger ones only - incidentally, those that wrote that letter.
Meanwhile the same telcos wants governments to heavily subsidize FTTH and 5G networks.
It is clear that if your network can't cope with customers demands and you have to invest you have two ways: lower shareholder dividends or increase prices. But they wish to avoid both to keep on looking good with both stock exchanges and customers, and deliver price increases through OTTs...
It's no surprise to see the Names that head the list of telcos, all the usual offenders who routinely overcharge their customers and then take their own sweet time crediting those customers with the wrongly taken funds.
So far, every time I have been offered services by a telco, it has never been a particularly good deal, especially if you read the small print which often wants you locked in for the first three years in order to qualify for their 'wonderful' offers.
They are generally too greedy, only look at the short term and tend to look down on the Big Tech 'Upstarts' as newcomers who have pushed them out of what they consider their territory.
Haha
Amusing. Now compare profits between a Telco and their infrastructure providers. The likes of Vodafone make far more profit, and the last 15-20 years has seen margins on infrastructure squeezed so hard the number of infrastructure vendors large enough to finance this has been greatly reduced.
Basically they're saying, Nik, Ericsson, Huawei (where possible), please give us your boxes for free. It won't/shouldn't fly.
What a weird argument. I am not a fan of “big-tech” but the argument according to me is bonkers. Why would bigtech pay for it, they aren't the consumers. And telecom providers all around the world charge extra than appropriate prices.
Net Neutrality
If some sites start paying the service providers for bandwidth, wouldn't they reasonably require that priority is given to traffic involving their site? Does that sound like a good idea?
Netflix...
putting servers inside the network of the IPSs and the mobile networks is all well and good, but they also need to reach the users of the network.
If the server in the networks data centre can't reach users in not-spots or in places where they only get dial-up speeds, those services are totally useless.
I just switched away from Vodafone, because I was on a 500mbps LTE contract, but at work I got around 0.001mbps and at home ~5-12mbps. I'm now paying a third of what I paid Vodafone for a 50mbps LTE contract and I get 8mbps at work and 20mbps at home.
If I was in the local city, I'd get around 60mbps, on a good day. It just wasn't worth paying 3 times as much for a theoretical 500mbps service, when they couldn't even deliver 1% of that most days!
I'm not saying Big Tech needs to co-invest, or that they don't, I'm just pointing out that putting servers inside the network doesn't help with the last mile delivery.
Re: Netflix...
500mbps LTE? Seems optimistic to expect that everywhere, as a single 20MHz carrier of LTE peaks out at 100mbps, so you need 5 carriers in carrier aggregation to get this (the most supported by the standard), plus a device that can receive it, plus a network that has deployed it in your location, plus limited contention, plus decent RF propagation (no noise) so that you can use the higher coding schemes...
Telcos have a legitimate beef with governments for being used as cash cows via spectrum auctions, and unfunded mandates like having to rip out their Huawei gear and install more expensive and technologically inferior Ericsson/Nokia instead. That said, no one forced them to overbid in the spectrum auctions.
As for the tech companies, if anything they are the ones who could be demanding payments. Without their content, no one would buy the telcos’ Internet service.
telcos vs big data
Big tech will win. Big tech always wins. Big tech knows everything. Cars are exciting, roads rarely are.