Documentation for the National IT and Telecom Agency (NITA)
Upgrading the cost model for mobile termination in Denmark
Data request for stakeholders
21 June 2011
Ref: 19176-205
.
Ref: 19176-205 .
Upgrading the cost model for mobile termination in Denmark | 24
Contents
1 Introduction 3
1.1 Purpose of this document 3
1.2 Process and timeline 3
1.3 Historical, current and forecast data 4
1.4 Granularity of information 4
1.5 Priority of information 5
1.6 Treatment of confidential information 5
1.7 Structure of this document 5
2 Coverage and demand data (Part 1 of data request) 6
2.1 Coverage data 6
2.2 Demand data 6
3 Network data (Part 1 of data request) 10
3.1 Asset information 10
3.2 Equipment lifetimes 10
3.3 Network dimensioning rules 12
3.4 Upcoming deployments 15
4 Data related to the pure LRIC approach (Part 2 of data request) 16
5 Interconnect data (Part 2 of data request) 17
6 Cost data (Part 2 of data request) 20
6.1 Bottom-up equipment unit costs 20
6.2 Top-down expenditure data 21
7 Questions regarding the data request 24
Annex A: Expansion of acronyms
Copyright © 2011. This document and the information contained are solely for the use of the National IT and Telecom Agency (NITA). The information contained herein is the property of Analysys Mason Limited and is provided on condition that it will not be reproduced, copied, lent or disclosed, directly or indirectly, nor used for any purpose other than that for which it was specifically furnished.
Analysys Mason Limited
St Giles Court
24 Castle Street
Cambridge CB3 0AJ
UK
Tel: +44 (0)845 600 5244
Fax: +44 (0)1223 460866
www.analysysmason.com
Registered in England No. 5177472
1 Introduction
1.1 Purpose of this document
This document describes the data requested from industry stakeholders in Denmark in the context of upgrading the cost model for mobile termination, originally developed by Analysys Mason Limited (‘Analysys Mason’) for NITA in 2007/2008.
Analysys Mason is currently planning to develop the cost model as follows:
· determine the costs for voice (and SMS) termination in accordance with the European Commission (EC) Recommendation from May 2009 (pure long-run incremental cost, LRIC)[1]
· develop the calculation for a generic operator, as well as refining the ‘bottom-up’ calculations of the networks already modelled, e.g. to update the calculations relating to the modelling of 2G and 3G networks in Denmark and service development (including high-speed packet access, HSPA)
· reconcile these bottom-up calculations against actual top-down information or a top-down model if submitted by Danish operators.
Any industry stakeholders are welcome to provide information, even purely qualitative, that may answer some of the questions set out in this document.
1.2 Process and timeline
The data-collection process is split in two parts:
· Par 1: Demand and network data – this data is necessary for the bottom-up model and must be provided before 12 September 2011.
· Part2: Cost data (both bottom-up and top-down) – this data will inform the costs in the model and overall reconciliation; it must be provided before 17 October 2011.
During the data-collection period, individual meetings can be organised between NITA, Analysys Mason and industry stakeholders. We anticipate these meetings to take place in the week commencing 29 August 2011.
1.3 Historical, current and forecast data
If possible, please provide data that relates to the calendar year 2010, indicating if year-average rather than year-end data is provided.
Please indicate the currency of any cost information provided (DKK or other). If possible, please provide cost data in nominal terms (i.e. money of that day) rather than transformed into any particular year real terms (e.g. 2006 real).
This data request is intended not to duplicate the data previously collected by NITA, but rather to collect previously unrequested data. For any data requested ‘over time’ or ‘in each year’, please provide data for as many historical years as available from 2006–2010. If forecasts for parameters or costs are readily available, please provide these for all forecast years that are available, noting the source of the forecast (e.g. budget, long-range plan).
1.4 Granularity of information
Most information points are requested for 2G, 3G, and high-speed downlink packet access (HSDPA) and Long Term Evolution (LTE) deployments (except where already held by NITA).
We realise that the LTE networks may not necessarily be modelled in the upgraded cost model, and this remains an issue to be finalised within the model specification. If the final conceptual decision is to exclude LTE networks from the modelling, then the LTE-specific components of the questions herein can be ignored by stakeholders. If the final decision is to include LTE in the model, then these questions will still apply. The finalisation of this conceptual decision will be communicated to industry during August 2011.
We recognise that not all operators currently have active networks. In such cases, the questions regarding LTE demand, etc. will not be relevant. However, in this case, we would still like to understand the extent of LTE network deployments, even if commercial services have not yet been launched, e.g. by reference to operational forward-plans.
We recognise that historical data is unlikely to be available to the same level of detail as recent data – in this situation, please provide historical totals, or aggregate figures. Please indicate if any particular data points are estimates as opposed to known parameters, and explain briefly the basis on which the estimate was derived.
We have suggested a top-down categorisation of costs to provide guidance on the level of granularity we are anticipating. If this categorisation is not readily applicable, then please provide data in an alternative categorisation and explain the alternative categorisation proposed.
1.5 Priority of information
Within each section of the data request we have prioritised the information which is most important to the accurate development of the upgraded cost model. Where possible, operators should ensure that higher-priority information is collected first, before spending effort on the lower-priority data items:
· extra-high priority items are labelled [PRIORITY ONE] and are of the greatest importance for the model
· high-priority data items are labelled [PriorityTwo]
· other items are labelled [PriorityThree].
1.6 Treatment of confidential information
Data provided will be of importance for the set-up of the upgraded cost model, to ensure that our bottom-up calculations are generating reasonable asset volumes and costs. However, there may be certain data-points that could be used in the actual model itself as inputs. We recognise that the cost model must take into account confidentiality considerations in this respect.
The objective of the model is to be transparent and shareable for all industry parties. Individual operator-specific data specified as confidential will not be released in the public model. However ranges of data points, which are relevant to the model, will be processed to remove commercial sensitivities and then used in the public transparent model, through the following approaches:
· aggregating the data across either groups of areas or the whole of the country
· using rounded, averaged or standardised input values (taking into account values from multiple responses).
1.7 Structure of this document
The remainder of this document is set out as follows:
· Section 2 sets out questions related to coverage and demand (Part 1 data)
· Section 3 sets out questions related to network data (Part 1 data)
· Section 4 sets out questions related to the pure LRIC approach (Part 2 data)
· Section 5 sets out questions related to interconnect services (Part 2 data)
· Section 6 sets out questions related to cost data (Part 2 data)
· Section 7 sets out the process for operators to make enquiries regarding this project.
Each section consists of questions requesting both qualitative and quantitative information.
Qualitative questions are typically open questions. They tend to deal with points that may be country-specific or operator-specific, or technical matters on which a better understanding is sought. Please provide quantitative data in a Microsoft Excel format whenever possible.
2 Coverage and demand data (Part 1 of data request)
This section sets out questions related to coverage (Section2.1) and demand (Section2.2).
2.1 Coverage data
Please provide the following data on year-end network coverage:
Q1. [PRIORITY ONE] For all categories in Figure 2.1, please fill in the network coverage of land area for each year-end in km2. Please specify the assumed signal strength for the data points provided (e.g. –85dBm for outdoor 2G coverage, –100dBm for outdoor 3G coverage).
Technology / 2006 / 2007 / 2008 / 2009 / 20102G (900MHz) / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
2G (1800MHz) / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
3G / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
HSDPA and/or HSUPA / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
LTE / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
Figure 2.1: Land area network coverage for outdoor voice [Source: Analysys Mason]
Q2. [PRIORITY ONE] For all categories in Figure 2.2, please fill in the network coverage of population for each year-end, in terms of million people. Please specify the assumed signal strength for the data points provided (e.g. –85dBm for outdoor 2G coverage, –100dBm for outdoor 3G coverage).
Technology / 2006 / 2007 / 2008 / 2009 / 20102G (900MHz) / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
2G (1800MHz) / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
3G / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
HSDPA and/or HSUPA / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
LTE / ? / ? / ? / ? / ?
Figure 2.2: Population network coverage for outdoor voice [Source: Analysys Mason]
Q3. [PriorityTwo] Please detail the number of indoor sites where the coverage is not provided by outdoor macro sites, for 2G, 3G and LTE. Please indicate in what proportions you deploy these sites – e.g. as micro sites, or pico sites, tunnel/distributed antenna sites, or other solutions.
2.2 Demand data
The first sub-section ‘Subscriptions and volumes’ asks for a number of data points for demand by 2G, 3G and LTE subscribers. Please provide volumes relating to the subscription type of the subscriber, rather than the network which actually carries the traffic. For example, if 2G/3G subscriber type data is not available, please provide the total of 2G plus 3G subscribers.
The subsequent sub-section ‘Network loading data’ requests information about the proportions of traffic that are actually carried by each network infrastructure. We shall utilise NITA’s latest market information wherever possible.
Subscriptions and volumes
Please provide the following data on subscriptions and volumes:
Q4. [PRIORITY ONE] For each service listed in Figure 2.3, please provide total annual traffic volumes from fixed networks, international networks and from other mobile networks. Please provide traffic data for the years 2006–2010 for all categories. If available please supply forecasts for the period 2011–2013 for all categories. This question should be answered in conjunction with Q9.
Please specify traffic volumes for full mobile virtual network operators (MVNO) separately in each case. Please include the traffic from any service providers (i.e. light MVNOs) in your total.
Off-net servicesIncoming off-net minutes from other networks
Percentage of incoming off-net minutes from other networks carried as national roaming
Outgoing off-net minutes to other networks
Percentage of outgoing off-net minutes to other networks carried as national roaming
Incoming off-net SMS from other networks
Outgoing off-net SMS to other networks
On-net services
Minutes to own mobile network, excluding calls to/from the voice mail system (VMS) and central servers
Total VMS retrieval minutes in each year[2], split between 2G and 3G subscribers
Total VMS deposit minutes (i.e. incoming and on-net calls which are picked up by the voicemail system), split between 2G and 3G subscribers (if known)
On-net SMS messages in each year
2G data[3] megabytes, in total and split by bearer – GPRS downlink, GPRS uplink (both including the average data rate throughput used per GPRS data transmission), EDGE downlink, EDGE uplink
3G data3 megabytes, in total and split by bearer – Release 99 uplink, Release 99 downlink, HSDPA, HSUPA
LTE data3 megabytes carried by the LTE network, split by downlink and uplink
Total 3G video call minutes, split by incoming versus outgoing versus on-net, and the maximum and/or average bearer rate which carries the traffic
Figure 2.3: Other traffic types of interest for the modelling work [Source: Analysys Mason]
Q5. [PriorityTwo] Total number of 2G mobile voice subscriptions (SIMs), stating how many are own subscription versus light MVNO or full MVNO for each year-end 2006–2010.
Q6. [PriorityTwo] Total number of 3G mobile voice subscriptions (SIMs), stating how many are own subscription versus light MVNO or full MVNO for each year-end 2006–2010.
Q7. [PRIORITY ONE] Number of SIMs for non-personal devices (year-end) – e.g. machine-to-machine. Please state the type of usage they generate (e.g. SMS, GPRS-only, UMTS, HSPA, LTE) and whether they are 2G, 3G or LTE. Please separate out laptop dongles, and state whether they are included in your responses to Q5 and Q6.
Q8. [PriorityThree] Names of light MVNOs and full MVNOs hosted on the network, over time (including any switches or migration between host networks).
Network loading data
Please provide the following data on network loading.
Q9. [PRIORITY ONE] The proportion of traffic which is carried by the 2G versus 3G networks, from 2006–2010 including any forecast of network loading, for:
a. incoming minutes from other networks
b. outgoing minutes to other networks
c. on-net minutes
d. incoming SMS from other networks
e. outgoing SMS to other networks
f. on-net SMS.
Q10. [PriorityTwo] Average duration of calls, from 2006–2010, and whether this differs by 2G/3G, for:
a. incoming calls
b. outgoing off-net calls
c. on-net calls
d. VMS calls (retrievals versus deposits)
e. ringing time per call, confirming or otherwise whether this is additive to the average conversational durations requested above.