ITV

Category: Regulators

  • Trai urges unified licensing to spur next generation networks

    Trai urges unified licensing to spur next generation networks

    MUMBAI: Telecom regulator Trai today said that operators should be encouraged to move to next generation networks (NGN) for effective utilisation of spectrum for mobile services asked government to act fast on unified licensing regime to make NGN a reality.

    Trai’s recommendations for a unified licensing regime, dated 13th January 2005, should be considered expeditiously so that various operators can make best use of NGN platform to provide all types of telecom, data, video and broadcast services through a single licence, Trai said in its recommendations.

    A statement issued by Trai today says: “Due to technological advancements there is a trend towards unification of networks & services leading to the emergence of Next Generation Networks, which are predominantly IP based. The NGNs enable the service providers to provide a wide range of services (voice, data, video) over the same platform.”

    In addition, NGNs also enable fixed-mobile convergence / substitution resulting into reduced demand on mobile services spectrum, the statement points out.

    Increase in broadband penetration is a must for wider deployment of NGN services and since the policy targets for broadband have not been met, it is time to undertake the review of various recommendations on broadband access related issues, Trai said, adding that unless various operators are able to deploy NGN in access to provide multiple services its full benefits cannot be made available to customers.

  • Trai moots Rs 50 million entry fee for convergence licence

    Trai moots Rs 50 million entry fee for convergence licence

    MUMBAI: Cable TV operators will have much to cheer with this recommendation from the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai). The broadcast and telecom regulator has suggested a much lower levy of Rs 50 million as entry fee for national and international long distance licence (NLD/ILD) in the converged scenario.

    Trai had earlier suggested Rs 1.07 billion, making it expensive for cable operators to move into telephony services. “If the government approves Trai’s recommendation, it will particularly benefit us as we are planning to enter into the triple play area,” says Siticable CEO Jagjit Kohli. Siticable, a leading multi-system operator (MSO), is a wholly owned subsidiary of Zee Telefilms.

    While asking the government to approve its unified licensing recommendations at the earliest, Trai also said in a release today that there should be reduction in the entry fee to reflect the changes made in the entry fee for NLD/ILD licence. “The entry fee should come down to Rs 50 million as against Rs 1.07 billion recommended earlier and this should further reduce to Rs 300,000 after five years as already recommended,” it said.

    In order to promote convergence and competition in broadcasting and telecommunications, the regulator has called for the clearance of the Communications Convergence Bill, 2001, albeit with some modifications. “There should be converged regulatory regime. The starting point for this exercise should be the Communications Convergence Bill, 2001. However, several changes need to be made in this Bill. Content regulation should be kept out of the purview of the converged regulator. The division of powers between the Government, TDSAT and TRAI should also broadly correspond to what is presently the position,” Trai said, releasing the recommendations on convergence.

    “Convergence of technologies is rapidly blurring the boundaries between telecommunications and broadcasting. It is necessary for the legal and regulatory framework to adapt to this convergence and actively promote such convergence. This would also help in facilitating competition,” the regulator said.

  • Govt role: CAS’ fate linked to political compulsions

    Govt role: CAS’ fate linked to political compulsions

    The Indian government (read the information and broadcasting ministry) is suddenly finding itself caught between the devil and the deep blue sea, which more often than not takes great pleasure in turning red.

    Sandwiched between a strident judiciary — justifiably so in the present circumstances — and the politics of running a coalition government with vocal allies (who seem to have a view on anything and everything), the Manmohan Singh regime is bound to find it difficult to implement a recent Delhi High Court order that in short says: implement conditional access system in the areas notified earlier by a previous Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition regime over 18 months ago.

    State-level elections in April-May would compel the government to give a deep thought to the so-called concerns of regional politicians. And, decision-making gets that much tougher when one of the states going to the polls, West Bengal, is ruled by a Left party, which is also a crucial ally of the federal government in New Delhi.

    The I&B ministry hasn’t yet held any talks with the various state governments where CAS is sought to be implemented. Nor have any meetings been held with industry stakeholders
    _____****_____

    Though the Delhi High Court order exhorts the I&B ministry to rise above regional level party politics and not use ‘public interest’ to influence an executive order (the notification related to CAS rollout) passed by the federal government, reticent politicians would definitely try to have their own way. Don’t forget that the I&B minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi’s parliamentary constituency lies in West Bengal and the street-smart politician has cut much of his political teeth in Bengal.

    With Kolkata in West Bengal, one of the metros targeted for CAS rollout, already swinging to the election tune, the I&B ministry would have to see how New Delhi’s Left-oriented allies react to the issue of CAS or ‘watching TV channels via a black box that would cost around Rs 3,000 (approximately $ 67),’ as some politicians are explaining addressability to the people.

    It can just be that the ministry goes in for an appeal one day ahead of the month-long court-mandated deadline
    _____****_____

    Though it hasn’t reached a crescendo, already there are murmurs amongst politicians of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), especially the local ones, on how CAS’ introduction around election time can be ‘disruptive’ and have telling effects on the electoral fortunes of the party in West Bengal.

    It is pertinent to note that the I&B ministry hasn’t yet held any talks with the various state governments where CAS is sought to be implemented. Nor have any meetings been held with industry stakeholders to discuss the issue in the light of the court’s observation.

    Apart from the West Bengal politicians, those representing the seven constituencies of Delhi in Parliament have already been petitioned by some cable operators on the ground that implementation of CAS might upset cable TV consumers of the National Capital Territory.

    With Delhi’s aam junta (hoi polloi) totally clueless on what CAS is all about — apart from what has been fed to them by politicians and the media — scepticism is bound to run all across on something new, which is not part of the basic infrastructure that is severely lacking here and making daily life that much more worrisome.

    And, the Congress-led Delhi government, trying to battle its own intra-party differences on demolition of illegal constructions all over Delhi (as directed by Delhi HC) that has left the denizens of the Capital fuming, the will to immediately implement another court order (on CAS) is definitely lacking.

    It would also be interesting to see how New Delhi could read the Delhi court order, which is not as simple as is being made out by many industry stakeholders — the benefits of CAS or addressability, notwithstanding.

    For the I&B ministry to plan a rollout of CAS as per the court order, it has to first revoke an executive order that suspended implementation of CAS.

    Now, here is the piece de resistance: the court order is silent on the fact whether addressability should be introduced, as per the prayer of the petitioners, ONLY in the south zones of the metro cities of Kolkata, Delhi, Chennai in Tamil Nadu and Mumbai in Maharashtra or the whole of the cities.

    After revoking an earlier notification, the federal government can stick to CAS’ introduction only in the south zones of the metros or interpret the court order as rollout in the whole of the cities. A clarification on the interpretation hasn’t been sought yet by the I&B ministry as there is a section that feels an appeal should be made against the present court order.

    If the government goes in for an appeal, which can turn out to be time consuming, then the timing of it would also be important. It can just be that the ministry goes in for an appeal one day ahead of the month-long court-mandated deadline.

    As things stand today, the government is keeping things fluid — deliberately so — to weigh all options, including the biggest challenge: political compulsions.

  • Delhi HC orders Government to implement CAS within four weeks

    Delhi HC orders Government to implement CAS within four weeks

    NEW DELHI / MUMBAI: In a decision that could have major ramifications for the Indian television industry, the Delhi High Court has ordered the government to enforce the rollout of addressability in cable pay television (conditional access system or CAS) in India within four weeks.

    Delivering its verdict on a writ petition filed by a bunch of MSOs, after reserving the judgement for several months, the court also directed the government to pay damages worth Rs 100,000 to the petitioners. The court has ordered the government to make haste on the report of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai), which has been pending before it since October 2004.

    The court has ordered the government to revoke its notification of 27 February 2004 that scrapped the rollout of CAS in the three metros of Mumbai, Delhi and Kolkata in phases (it eventually got implemented only in Chennai). This in effect will revive the notification of 10 July 2003 which provided for partial CAS in these three metros.

    The Delhi HC also said that the government cannot denotify an earlier notification on CAS and keep the issue in limbo. The government has the right to appeal against the order in Delhi HC and Supreme Court.
    No immediate reaction, however, was available from the government as information and broadcasting ministry officials said that the court verdict is being “studied in its entirety.”

    The court gave the order in response to a writ petition filed by MSOs in response to the government’s decision to withdraw CAS. The petitioners include Hathway, INCablenet and RPG’s cable company that was bought over by Siti Cable last year.

    Reacting to the court direction on CAS, MSO Alliance president Ashok Mansukhani said that their viewpoint stands vindicated. “The verdict is a clear direction to the government to start the process of CAS, which will help bring transparency in the market and choice to consumers.”

    Added Hathway Cable & Datacom CEO K Jayaraman: “We will cooperate wholeheartedly with the government to roll out CAS.”

    But with Tata Sky preparing to launch in June, is the timing too close for cable to have an advantage over direct-to-home (DTH)? “The deployment of digital cable is going to be in a phased manner as directed by the court in line with the last notification. It will evolve first in the notified areas of the metros specified, like south Mumbai and Delhi. Besides, cable networks who can offer value additions to subscribers like data and telephony will stand to gain. Also, analogue cable will be available,” said Siticable CEO Jagjit Kohli.

    Will supply of boxes at such a short notice be a matter of concern? Cable Operators’ Federation of India head Roop Sharma brushes aside such criticisms saying, “The cable industry has enough stock of set-top boxes.”

    Welcoming the judgement, Sharma further said, “This would break the monopoly of broadcasters and bring respite to consumers also.”

    However, National Cable and Telecom Association president and owner of Delhi’s Home Cable Network Vikki Chowdhry was more cautious in his reaction, saying the full text of the court order has to be seen before jumping to any conclusion.

    According to Chowdhry, if the court order pertains to CAS rollout in only south zones of some cities, as once had been discussed earlier, then the impact would be neutralised and “create legal and operational problems.”

    Chowdhry added that if the south zone formula was implemented by the government, then his company would appeal against it to higher authorities, including the Supreme Court.

    The court dismissed the government’s contention that implementation of CAS was unjustifiable. The government has been ordered to compensate the MSOs for losses incurred due to the non implementation of CAS to the tune of Rs 100,000.

    In January, information and broadcasting secretary SK Arora appeared before the court and sought three months time to implement CAS in the country. The request was rejected by Justice Vikramjit Sen. Petitioner Hathway Cable Datacom’s counsel Indu Malhotra submitted that the government was only buying time to delay the implementation of CAS.

    Additional solicitor general PP Malhotra, who appeared for the government, had submitted that the issue of CAS had been decided by another division bench of the High Court in December 2003.

    CAS rollout plan as originally envisaged in 2003:

    * Initial 15-day period will be used primarily for creating consumer awareness about CAS, procurement of set-top boxes by cable operators and MSOs, and for broadcasters of pay channels to conduct promotional campaigns.

    * Each of the three notified metro cities (Delhi, Mumbai, and Kolkata) would be divided into four zones for the purpose of staggered rollout of the addressable system of transmission of pay channels.

    * After the initial 15-day period, within a one-month time frame, in Zone A in each metro, pay channels can be watched only with the use of STBs. Pay channel consumers in this zone will be charged, in addition to the price of the basic tier plus taxes, only for the individual channels of their choice as per the pre-announced rates set for them.

    Consumers of free-to-air (FTA) channels, who will not need an STB, will be charged only the basic FTA channel package charge plus taxes. In zones B, C, and D, cable operators will charged only for the basic tier plus taxes for all channels, including all available pay channels.

    * From Day 1 of the second month onwards, CAS will take effect in Zone B in each metro, while in zones C and D subscribers will pay only for the basic tier plus taxes for all channels.

    * And so it follows in Zone C from Day 1 of the third month onwards and Zone D from Day 1 of the fourth month onwards.

  • CAS Ruling: MSOs now have the ammo to take on DTH

    CAS Ruling: MSOs now have the ammo to take on DTH

    It was one piece of news that cable TV networks were waiting to hear for long, too long in actual fact!

     

    Buffeted by potential competition from direct-to-home (DTH) operators, the timing of the Delhi High Court ruling that has ordered the government to enforce the rollout of conditional access system (CAS) in India within four weeks couldn’t have been more crucial. Tata Sky is preparing to launch in June and Dish TV, at present the only existing private sector DTH service provider, is expected to sort out programming contracts with Star India and SET Discovery by then.

     

    Cable TV can take DTH head on with its digital service. It has the firepower to do so, having built a rich battery of last mile operators (LMOs) who have serviced consumers over the years.

     

    Firstly, it can cobble together more channels than DTH can offer at the initial stage when the consumer is making the shift from analogue to digital. Already, some MSOs are making available a little under 150 TV channels. DTH operators, on the other hand, are limited by transponder space on satellite and can only ramp up under MPEG-4 compression technology.

     

    Second, cable TV can bundle broadband and, with preparation in future, telephony services.

     

    Third, it can develop interactive features with its fibre network.

     

    Fourth, it has manpower in place which can be quickly energised to push digital set-top boxes (STBs).

     

    Sure, MSOs and independent operators would have preferred the courts to have come up with the same verdict much earlier, after the government withdrew CAS in 2004. That would have given them a first mover advantage with a considerable time lag before DTH could kickstart operations.

     

    But there was one issue which had still to be sorted out for an effective rollout: LMOs felt insecure and did not back the rollout of digital cable. With competition from DTH looming large, they now have the support of their franchisee operators.

     

    But what if the verdict on CAS had come after Tata Sky’s launch and Dish TV’s content contracts had been stitched with Star and Sony? Cable TV operators would have been able to fight against DTH with two weapons in their armoury – analogue cable and voluntary digitalisation. On analogue cable, operators have the flexibility of dropping subscription fees drastically. With a price warrior in place through analogue service, digital cable could offer an alternate choice to consumers to combat DTH head on. On the flip side, the digital service would still remain unaddressable while DTH could provide consumers the choice of selecting channels and packages they want to pay for.

     

    Under CAS, cable operators do not have the flexibility of delivering pay channels on their analogue network. Consumers will have to select between DTH and digital cable for receiving these channels. They will, in other words, have to buy either a DTH or a cable TV set-top box.

     

    But delaying the direct knock-to-knock face-off between cable and DTH operators hardly serves any purpose. The business model for MSOs and independent operators can only get worse if no CAS is in place. Because the way out to stop DTH from invading into cable territory without a properly tiered and price-packaged digital service would have been possible only through rate drops. While LMOs would have been unaffected, the MSOs would have felt the pinch.

     

    Retooling business strategies and organising the sector is in the commercial interest of the cable operators. The hour has come to change the mindset and bring in quality and service-oriented practices. It will be meaningless to wish away competition from DTH and later IPTV providers.

     

    Several networks already have a stockpile of digital STBs. So far, they have been unable to place these boxes in consumer homes. Even Hathway Cable & Datacom, the more aggressive of the digital cable TV players, claims it has managed to distribute just 40,000 boxes. It would do better for operators to take a more positive view: that with CAS, digitalisation, either through cable or DTH or IPTV, would move faster.

     

    After all, the market is too big and diverse for any single player to cover it all.

     

    Ensuring a ramp up in supply of boxes, erecting a solid encryption system, and having a sound billing mechanism should be the focus areas. Also, it is crucial for operators to find more, better and premium content which can lure customers. They will also have to work out rental schemes and low up-front charges to subsidise the boxes in order to stay competitive with DTH.

     

    Another hard lesson to be learnt from this is that investments on old technologies won’t help. For those who have put their money on analogue STBs, the chances of surviving the battle look grim. Yes, there is a market for free-to-air analogue service. But no, not for analogue STBs as that will limit the channel offerings at a time when supply is growing rapidly.

     

    There will be competitive pressure for cable operators to upgrade their networks and services. Territorial monopolies will end and cable operators will also have to fight amongst themselves for retaining or acquiring subscribers.

     

    DTH, of course, retains one advantage. It has a national footprint while CAS is limited to the four metros in the first phase. This will give DTH economies of scale, but then it will still face the big hurdle of drawing in consumers to buy a box in the non-CAS areas.

     

    By bringing in CAS, the MSOs realise the entire business model changes in favour of them. Gaining control over the entire value chain across the network and having an addressable system will pump up valuation of cable companies and draw in global investors.

     

    The green signal on CAS couldn’t have come at a riper time. If there is any year which can drive digitalisation forward, this is it. In June-July, ESPN Star Sports will show live the football World Cup. The other key properties on the roster are ICC cricket Champions Trophy in September and the cricket World Cup early 2007 (both events on Sony).

  • Trai asks DTH operators to file inter-connect agreements with broadcasters

    Trai asks DTH operators to file inter-connect agreements with broadcasters

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) today directed DTH operators to file with the designated authority their inter-connect agreements with various broadcasters.

    This move, the regulator said, will be in addition to an existing obligation placed on the broadcasters, in terms of a 31 December 2004 directive, to file their inter-connect agreements entered with a DTH operator.

    “The amendment to (regulations) for filing by the DTH operator has been done to facilitate better monitoring and to provide for specific informational requirements relevant to DTH platform,” Trai said in a statement soon after a Delhi court directed the government to plan rollout of CAS within four weeks.

    Since the number of agreements that would be entered into by a DTH operator with broadcasters will not be voluminous as in the case of cable TV, it should be possible to provide for filing of copies of individual agreements, Trai explained, nipping in the bud any criticism of such a move.

    The regulator would separately be specifying the procedure to be adopted by DTH operators for the filing(s) after amended regulations are notified.

    On 31 December 2004, Trai had issued regulations for filing and registration of interconnect agreements entered into by broadcasters with service providers under different platforms.

    In line with the detailed recommendations of TRAI on issues relating to broadcasting and distribution of TV channels, it was stated in paragraph 5 of the explanatory memorandum to the above regulation that the agreements entered into between a MSO and a local cable operator (LCO) shall be registered with the authorized officers under the Cable Act.

    Subsequently, on 2 December 2005, these regulations were amended to bring about flexibility in adopting procedures as regard to the manner of filing, formats of filing, etc of the inter-connect agreements.