abhishreshthaa
Abhijeet S
From India’s booming technology sector, whose continued success of course depends on the \ quality of communications infrastructure. Despite several hiccups along the way, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the independent regulator, has earned a reputation for
transparency and competence. With the recent resolution of a major dispute between cellular and fixed operators, Indian telecommunications already among the most competitive markets in the world appears set to continue growing rapidly.
While telecom liberalization is usually associated with the post-1991 era, the seeds of reform were actually planted in the 1980s. At that time, Rajiv Gandhi proclaimed his intention of “leading India into the 21st century,” and carved the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) out of the Department of Posts and Telegraph. For a time he also even considered corporatizing the DOT, before succumbing to union pressure.
In a compromise, Gandhi created two DOT-owned corporations: Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL), to serve Delhi and Bombay, and VideshSanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL), to operate international telecom services. He also introduced private capital into the manufacturing of telecommunications equipment, which had previously been a DOT monopoly. Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry
These and other reforms were limited by the unstable coalition politics of the late 1980s. It was not until the early 1990s, when the political situation stabilized, and with the general momentum for economic reforms, that telecommunications liberalization really took off. In 1994, the government released its National Telecommunications Policy (NTP-94), which allowed private fixed operators to take part in the Indian market for the first time (cellular operators had been allowed into the four largest metropolitan centers in 1992). Under the government’s new policy, India was divided into 20 circles roughly corresponding to state boundaries, each of which would contain two fixed operators (including the incumbent), and two mobile operators.
As ground-breaking as NTP-94 was, its implementation was unfortunately marred by regulatory uncertainty and over-bidding. A number of operators were unable to live up to their profligate bids and, confronted with far less lucrative networks than they had supposed, pulled out of the country. As a result, competition in India’s telecom sector did not really become a reality until 1999. At that time the government’s New Telecommunications Policy (NTP-99) switched from a fixed fee license to a revenue sharing regime of approximately 15%.
This figure has subsequently been lowered (to 10%- Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry12%), and is expected to be reduced even further over the coming years.Still, India continues to derive substantial revenue from license fees ($800 million in 2001-2002), leading some critics to suggest that the government has abrogated its responsibilities as a regulator to those as a seller. Another, perhaps even more significant, problem with India’s initial attempts to introduce competition was the lack of regulatory clarity. Private operators complained that the licensor – the DOT – was also the incumbent operator.
The many stringent conditions attached to licenses were thus seen by many as the DOT’s attempt to limit competition. It was in response to such concerns that the government in 1997 set up the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the nation’s first independent telecom regulator. Over the years, TRAI has earned a growing reputation for independence,transparency and an increasing level of competence. Early on, however, the regulator was beleaguered on all fronts. It had to contend with political interference, the incumbent’s many challenges to its authority, and accusations of ineptitude by private players.
Throughout the late 1990s, TRAI’s authority was steadily whittled away in a number of cases, when the courts repeatedly held that regulatory power lay with the central government. It was not until 2000, with the passing of the TRAI Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry Amendment Act, that the regulatory body really came into its own. Coming just a year after NTP-99, the act marks something of a watershed moment in the history of India telecom liberalization Today, there are many private players like Vodafone, Airtel, Tata, Reliance, Idea etc. There are basically two areas in which these players operate: Fixed and Cellular Services.
In Fixed line, MTNL and BSNL have captured major art of the market. Whereas, Cellular Services, can be further divided into two parts: GlobalSystem for Mobile Communications (GSM) and Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA).from India’s booming technology sector, whose continued success of course depends on the quality of communications infrastructure. Despite several hiccups along the way, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the independent regulator, has earned a reputation for transparency and competence. With the recent resolution of a major dispute between cellular and fixed operators, Indian telecommunications already among the most competitive markets in the world appears set to continue growing rapidly. While telecom liberalization is usually associated with the post-1991 era, the seeds of reform were actually planted in the 1980s.
At that time, Rajiv Gandhi proclaimed his intention of “leading India into the 21st century,” and carved the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) out of the Department of Posts and Telegraph. For a time he also even considered corporatizing the DOT, before succumbing to union pressure. In a compromise, Gandhi created two DOT-owned corporations: Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL), to serve Delhi and Bombay, and Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL), to operate international telecom services.
He also introduced private capital into the manufacturing of telecommunications equipment, which had previously been a DOT monopoly. Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry
These and other reforms were limited by the unstable coalition politics of the late 1980s. It was not until the early 1990s, when the political situation stabilized, and with the general momentum for economic reforms, that telecommunications liberalization really took off. In 1994, the government released its National Telecommunications Policy (NTP-94), which allowed private fixed operators to take part in the Indian market for the first time (cellular operators had been allowed into the four largest metropolitan centers in 1992). Under the government’s new policy, India was divided into 20 circles roughly corresponding to state boundaries, each of which would
contain two fixed operators (including the incumbent), and two mobile operators. As ground-breaking as NTP-94 was, its implementation was unfortunately marred by regulatory uncertainty and over-bidding.
A number of operators were unable to live up to their profligate bids and, confronted with far less lucrative networks than they had supposed, pulled out of the country. As a result, competition in India’s telecom sector did not really become a reality until 1999. At that time the government’s New Telecommunications Policy (NTP-99) switched from a fixed fee license to a revenue sharing regime of approximately 15%. This figure has subsequently been lowered (to 10%- Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry 12%), and is expected to be reduced even further over the coming years.
Still, India continues to derive substantial revenue from license fees ($800 million in 2001-2002), leading some critics to suggest that the government has abrogated its responsibilities as a regulator to those as a seller. Another, perhaps even more significant, problem with India’s initial
attempts to introduce competition was the lack of regulatory clarity. Private operators complained that the licensor – the DOT – was also the incumbent operator.
The many stringent conditions attached to licenses were thus seen by many as the DOT’s attempt to limit competition. It was in response to such concerns that the government in 1997 set up the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the nation’s first independent telecom regulator. Over the years, TRAI has earned a growing reputation for independence, transparency and an increasing level of competence.
Early on, however, the regulator was beleaguered on all fronts. It had to contend with political interference, the incumbent’s many challenges to its authority, and accusations of ineptitude by private players. Throughout the late 1990s, TRAI’s authority was steadily whittled away in a number of cases, when the courts repeatedly held that regulatory power lay with the central government. It was not until 2000, with the passing of the TRAI Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry Amendment Act, that the regulatory body really came into its own.
Coming just a year after NTP-99, the act marks something of a watershed moment in the history of India telecom liberalization. Today, there are many private players like Vodafone, Airtel, Tata, Reliance, Idea etc. There are basically two areas in which these players operate: Fixed
and Cellular Services. In Fixed line, MTNL and BSNL have captured major part of the market. Whereas, Cellular Services, can be further divided into two parts: Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) and Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA).
transparency and competence. With the recent resolution of a major dispute between cellular and fixed operators, Indian telecommunications already among the most competitive markets in the world appears set to continue growing rapidly.
While telecom liberalization is usually associated with the post-1991 era, the seeds of reform were actually planted in the 1980s. At that time, Rajiv Gandhi proclaimed his intention of “leading India into the 21st century,” and carved the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) out of the Department of Posts and Telegraph. For a time he also even considered corporatizing the DOT, before succumbing to union pressure.
In a compromise, Gandhi created two DOT-owned corporations: Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL), to serve Delhi and Bombay, and VideshSanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL), to operate international telecom services. He also introduced private capital into the manufacturing of telecommunications equipment, which had previously been a DOT monopoly. Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry
These and other reforms were limited by the unstable coalition politics of the late 1980s. It was not until the early 1990s, when the political situation stabilized, and with the general momentum for economic reforms, that telecommunications liberalization really took off. In 1994, the government released its National Telecommunications Policy (NTP-94), which allowed private fixed operators to take part in the Indian market for the first time (cellular operators had been allowed into the four largest metropolitan centers in 1992). Under the government’s new policy, India was divided into 20 circles roughly corresponding to state boundaries, each of which would contain two fixed operators (including the incumbent), and two mobile operators.
As ground-breaking as NTP-94 was, its implementation was unfortunately marred by regulatory uncertainty and over-bidding. A number of operators were unable to live up to their profligate bids and, confronted with far less lucrative networks than they had supposed, pulled out of the country. As a result, competition in India’s telecom sector did not really become a reality until 1999. At that time the government’s New Telecommunications Policy (NTP-99) switched from a fixed fee license to a revenue sharing regime of approximately 15%.
This figure has subsequently been lowered (to 10%- Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry12%), and is expected to be reduced even further over the coming years.Still, India continues to derive substantial revenue from license fees ($800 million in 2001-2002), leading some critics to suggest that the government has abrogated its responsibilities as a regulator to those as a seller. Another, perhaps even more significant, problem with India’s initial attempts to introduce competition was the lack of regulatory clarity. Private operators complained that the licensor – the DOT – was also the incumbent operator.
The many stringent conditions attached to licenses were thus seen by many as the DOT’s attempt to limit competition. It was in response to such concerns that the government in 1997 set up the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the nation’s first independent telecom regulator. Over the years, TRAI has earned a growing reputation for independence,transparency and an increasing level of competence. Early on, however, the regulator was beleaguered on all fronts. It had to contend with political interference, the incumbent’s many challenges to its authority, and accusations of ineptitude by private players.
Throughout the late 1990s, TRAI’s authority was steadily whittled away in a number of cases, when the courts repeatedly held that regulatory power lay with the central government. It was not until 2000, with the passing of the TRAI Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry Amendment Act, that the regulatory body really came into its own. Coming just a year after NTP-99, the act marks something of a watershed moment in the history of India telecom liberalization Today, there are many private players like Vodafone, Airtel, Tata, Reliance, Idea etc. There are basically two areas in which these players operate: Fixed and Cellular Services.
In Fixed line, MTNL and BSNL have captured major art of the market. Whereas, Cellular Services, can be further divided into two parts: GlobalSystem for Mobile Communications (GSM) and Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA).from India’s booming technology sector, whose continued success of course depends on the quality of communications infrastructure. Despite several hiccups along the way, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the independent regulator, has earned a reputation for transparency and competence. With the recent resolution of a major dispute between cellular and fixed operators, Indian telecommunications already among the most competitive markets in the world appears set to continue growing rapidly. While telecom liberalization is usually associated with the post-1991 era, the seeds of reform were actually planted in the 1980s.
At that time, Rajiv Gandhi proclaimed his intention of “leading India into the 21st century,” and carved the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) out of the Department of Posts and Telegraph. For a time he also even considered corporatizing the DOT, before succumbing to union pressure. In a compromise, Gandhi created two DOT-owned corporations: Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL), to serve Delhi and Bombay, and Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL), to operate international telecom services.
He also introduced private capital into the manufacturing of telecommunications equipment, which had previously been a DOT monopoly. Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry
These and other reforms were limited by the unstable coalition politics of the late 1980s. It was not until the early 1990s, when the political situation stabilized, and with the general momentum for economic reforms, that telecommunications liberalization really took off. In 1994, the government released its National Telecommunications Policy (NTP-94), which allowed private fixed operators to take part in the Indian market for the first time (cellular operators had been allowed into the four largest metropolitan centers in 1992). Under the government’s new policy, India was divided into 20 circles roughly corresponding to state boundaries, each of which would
contain two fixed operators (including the incumbent), and two mobile operators. As ground-breaking as NTP-94 was, its implementation was unfortunately marred by regulatory uncertainty and over-bidding.
A number of operators were unable to live up to their profligate bids and, confronted with far less lucrative networks than they had supposed, pulled out of the country. As a result, competition in India’s telecom sector did not really become a reality until 1999. At that time the government’s New Telecommunications Policy (NTP-99) switched from a fixed fee license to a revenue sharing regime of approximately 15%. This figure has subsequently been lowered (to 10%- Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry 12%), and is expected to be reduced even further over the coming years.
Still, India continues to derive substantial revenue from license fees ($800 million in 2001-2002), leading some critics to suggest that the government has abrogated its responsibilities as a regulator to those as a seller. Another, perhaps even more significant, problem with India’s initial
attempts to introduce competition was the lack of regulatory clarity. Private operators complained that the licensor – the DOT – was also the incumbent operator.
The many stringent conditions attached to licenses were thus seen by many as the DOT’s attempt to limit competition. It was in response to such concerns that the government in 1997 set up the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the nation’s first independent telecom regulator. Over the years, TRAI has earned a growing reputation for independence, transparency and an increasing level of competence.
Early on, however, the regulator was beleaguered on all fronts. It had to contend with political interference, the incumbent’s many challenges to its authority, and accusations of ineptitude by private players. Throughout the late 1990s, TRAI’s authority was steadily whittled away in a number of cases, when the courts repeatedly held that regulatory power lay with the central government. It was not until 2000, with the passing of the TRAI Critically analyze the customer preference and satisfaction measurement in Indian Telecom Industry Amendment Act, that the regulatory body really came into its own.
Coming just a year after NTP-99, the act marks something of a watershed moment in the history of India telecom liberalization. Today, there are many private players like Vodafone, Airtel, Tata, Reliance, Idea etc. There are basically two areas in which these players operate: Fixed
and Cellular Services. In Fixed line, MTNL and BSNL have captured major part of the market. Whereas, Cellular Services, can be further divided into two parts: Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) and Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA).