As the government finally gears up to implement the much-awaited mobile number portability (MNP) from November 25 in a phased manner, ever wondered why its supposed Diwali gift has failed to enthuse the mobile subscribers as much as it did when they first heard of it some four years ago?
Technology is the fastest moving innovation in these times and any delay in implementing a technological feature makes it redundant. Not only has this happened in the case of MNP but there are several other instances in the telecom space, like carrier access code, Internet telephony and mobile virtual network operators (MVNO), which have lost their relevance today for the Indian consumer just because of their delayed arrival due to the government?s habit of procrastination.
MNP today becomes an interesting case study of an idea whose time has elapsed or better still how technology and markets finds their own way to address consumer needs. In the backdrop of poor service quality due to congested networks of most mobile operators, MNP would have allowed mobile phone users to change service providers while retaining their numbers. Apart from addressing consumer grievances in a more effective manner, it would also have brought about an increased competition among the various operators negating the advantages that first movers generally have.
Trai first recommended that MNP be implemented in 2006 and the government accepted its recommendation a year and a half later. The dominant mobile operators were very critical of the move and the DoT kept on postponing its implementation date ad nauseum on some pretext or the other, so much so that both the consumers and operators lost interest in it.
As there were delays in implementation of MNP, the Indian telecom market witnessed several other changes. The number of operators doubled from around 6-7 to 13-14. Tariffs further fell leading to a mad scramble to get subscribers. Since changing numbers is largely not preferred by consumers, low tariffs and entry cost related to acquiring mobile connections led to multiple connections by most urban consumers. With innovative device manufacturers coming out with dual-SIM handsets, using multiple connections was never easier.
The enthusiasm may be less but the delayed implementation of MNP would still have some charm for the consumer. However, in several other cases, the delay has made the original idea behind a technological innovation totally redundant.
The carrier access code (CAC) is a prime example. The scheme was supposed to be implemented in 2005 but was finally abandoned in 2009 because nobody felt its need any more. The facility meant that a landline user could use the long distance (STD and ISD) services of any other service provider, thus bringing competition in long distance tariffs, which then used to be much higher than local call rates. Naturally it was opposed by almost all the operators because the higher STD/ISD rates used to cross-subsidise the lower local call rates. In 2006, when the state-owned BSNL came with its OneIndia scheme, which for the first time brought parity between the two rates, other operators followed suit and in the hyper-competitive Indian telecom market, it did not take much time for long distance tariffs to fall to low single digits. It was the same government and operators who delayed the CAC, later asked, ?Who needs CAC??
MVNO model is another example. It allows licensed operators to franchise services to others who can sell more effectively. Thus, if an operator feels that it cannot market its services well but has an excellent network, it can franchise sales and marketing to somebody who can do it best. The government still does not allow MVNOs but companies like Tata Teleservices innovatively worked out their own franchise agreement with UK?s Virgin Mobile in the country with some success. Today, even BSNL and MTNL are looking for franchises for their 3G services under the same model.
So, if the government or regulator think they are best fit to decide when and how to allow which technology or facility to consumers, they are living in Stone Age. In today?s technology-driven world, nobody can really stop an idea whose time has come!
anandita.mankotia@ expressindia.com