Over 4 lakh ring in WLL service
PRAGATI VERMA
TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ MONDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2002 01:06:23 AM ]
NEW DELHI: Even as limited mobility services' fate hangs in uncertainity, the poor man's mobile services are proving to be a hit.
More than 4.1 lakh subscribers have hooked on to the mobile phones based on CDMA-based wireless in local loop services, though most mega-launches are still pending.
While the Supreme Court judgement is awaited, 41.5 lakh subscribers are hooked on to limited mobility phones till the end of November, according to figures from Association of Basic Operators.
Almost 4 crore phones have been installed by basic operators, out of which 3.91 core are wireline, and 3.75 are wireless (fixed) and 4.15 lakh limited mobility phones.
Among private operators, Bharti Telenet has the highest number of total subscribers with 2.96 lakh connections Tata Teleservices, however, has the highest number of limited mobility subscribers, with 92,472 subscribers.
While Bharti, which has operations in Delhi, Haryana, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu has 2.65 lakh wireline connections, it has 30,437 wireless (fixed) subscribers. It does not offer limited mobility services.
Tata Teleservices, with operations in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, have 83,044 subscribers, 61,026 wireless (fixed) subscribers and 92,472 limited mobility subscribers.
The company has also launched services in Gujarat and Delhi circles in the last two weeks.
While HFCL Infotel has 34,365 limited mobility subscribers, it has 16,074 wireless (fixed) and 58,015 wireline subscribers in Punjab. Shyam Telelink has about 27,783 limited mobility subscribers, 3,431 wireless (fixed) subscribers and 25,106 wireline subscribers.
While Reliance's ambitious plans are the talk of the town, Tata Teleservices has some ambitious tariff plans to attract the subscribers to poor man's mobile phones.
Reliance Infocomm will be launching its limited mobility services in 104 cities on December 28 when it kicks off operations. About 60,000 km of optic fibre is believed to have already been lit up.
economictimes.indiatimes.com
==========
What is wireless in local loop technology?
[ MONDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2002 01:19:28 AM ]
In traditional telephone networks, your phone would be connected to the nearest exchange through a pair of copper wires.
Wireless local loop (WLL) technology simply means that the subscriber is connected to the nearest exchange through a radio link instead of through these copper wires.
What are the advantages of WLL over traditional wire-line connectivity?
In general, WLL is cheaper and quicker than copper wire connectivity. As the cost of copper rises over time and so does the cost of digging, this is likely to become an ever more significant advantage.
In a traditional wire-line network, the cost of the ‘last mile’ would amount to a substantial portion of the total cost of putting up the network.
This would be particularly true in remote locations with few subscribers or in difficult terrain. It is this part of the cost that WLL significantly reduces.
The economics of WLL thus works in its favour. WLL is also a more suitable technology for a quick rollout of a network as it bypasses digging ditches to lay copper wires.
This is a significant factor in crowded urban localities, where permission to dig may be almost impossible to get. Another major advantage of using a radio link for the last mile is that it considerably reduces the number of faults.
Close to 90% of all basic telephone faults occur in the last mile part of the network. With a radio link replacing the wires, these faults become almost negligible.
What are the major wireless access technologies?
There are various technologies like frequency division multiple access (FDMA), time division multiple access (TDMA) and code division multiple access (CDMA) used for WLL.
The one that is being used in India is CDMA. This is a full-fledged cellular mobile technology. In fact, it is the most dominant technology for mobile phone services in countries like the US and Korea.
If WLL is based on cellular technology, why are we talking of limited mobility?
This is a case of a regulatory restriction getting confused with a technology limitation. Government policy in India has laid down that fixed line operators will also be allowed to use WLL technology to offer mobility within a single billing area, or what is technically called a short distance calling area (SDCA), broadly equivalent to a single town or city.
However, they will not be allowed to offer mobile services with roaming facilities. This is a stipulation of the government, not a limitation of CDMA.
What is the reason for opposition to the introduction of WLL by cellular operators?
Again, it is not to the introduction of WLL per se, but to the concept of limited mobility that the cellular operators — who are based on the GSM technology, which is the dominant cellular mobile technology worldwide — are objecting.
Cellular operators say that the notion of limited mobility is farcical, firstly because it would be difficult to ensure that the mobility being offered remains ‘limited’. More importantly, they point out, about 90% of all existing cellular subscribers in India do not use roaming facilities or move outside their SDCAs.
Thus, the mobility being offered by WLL operators is hardly limited for most customers and allowing limited mobility amounts to giving entry to another mobile operator in the circle.
But, you may ask, why is that objectionable. The cellular operators say it would not be if WLL operators — who are basic fixed line service providers — and cellular operators were given a level playing field in terms of licence fees, access charges and so on. They have gone to court challenging limited mobility.
Why are WLL tariffs so much lower than cellular tariffs if both are essentially mobile telephony?
Here again, there is a dispute. Cellular operators initially argued that WLL tariffs were set so low because basic service providers could cross-subsidise these from higher revenue shares from long distance calls.
Subsequently, the revenue shares from long distance calls were made the same for basic and cellular operators. Cellular operators now allege that the WLL tariffs (which are the same as fixed-line tariffs) are being maintained low as a “predatory pricing” tactic.
Basic service providers, on the other hand, insist that the tariffs involve no subsidy and that they have established this with the telecom regulator.
economictimes.indiatimes.com |
