To: John Biddle who wrote (31684 ) 1/25/2003 5:11:35 AM From: rkral Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 197054 "For two years now, limited mobility or WLL-M has triggered a great deal of business acrimony in the telecom industry. The mobile operators have been complaining about the lack of a level playing field. Their contention: When a call is made from a mobile phone to a WLL-M phone, the mobile subscriber pays rupees 1.20 ($1=rupees 48) for three minutes in addition to the airtime. Of this, rupees 1.14 is paid by the cellular operator to the basic or WLL-M operator . In other words, the basic operator does not charge anything to its subscribers for incoming calls, but gets Rs 1.14 per call received from the mobile operator . But when a call is made from a WLL-M phone to a cell phone, the cellular operator gets nothing. The fixed-line subscriber is charged Rs 1.20 for a 3-minute call and the money is kept by the fixed-line operator . !!!!!!!!!!! That's an excerpt from the article .. and it's a lesson in obfuscation. <g> Are there really five different operators involved here? Of course not, there are four. The author says "rupees 1.14 is paid by the cellular operator to the basic or WLL-M operator". Yes (s)he did, but does that mean "cellular operator to the basic operator, or cellular operator to the WLL-M operator" .. OR .. does it mean "cellular operator to the basic operator, also known as the mobile operator"? You've got to already know the answer, to know what the author means. OK, OK, I see what you mean. But like I said, there are four operators. Really? Aren't the cellular operators also known as the mobile operators? Well, now that you mention that .. you know, I think you're right .. and I hate it when you're right. So OK, we only have three operators. It would appear so. But, .. aren't the WLL-M operations part of the same company that has the fixed-line operations? $h1t, you're right again .. and that literally stinks. Does that mean there are only two operators? <gg> Seriously, there are three different businesses (operations) here: the fixed-line, the cellular, and the WLL-M (limited-mobility). ("Cellular is more descriptive than "mobile", and "WLL-M" is much more descriptive than "basic". Additionally, "mobile" might be confused with "limited-mobility".) The fixed-line business and WLL-M business should be considered as two separate companies, even though part of the same company. Interconnect charges made by the fixed-line "company" to it's sister company, the WLL-M "company", should be the same as the charges to the cellular operator. IMHO, that is the only way a level playing field will occur. Mostly JMHO, and I might be interpreting the situation incorrectly. Ron