-864235 -144145 0 0 Taavi Kotka Majandus- ja Kommunikatsiooniministeerium Harju 11 15072 TALLINN Teie 11.12.2015 nr 15-00728/001 Meie 04.01.16 nr 22-7/ 15-1826-002 Euroopa Liid u avalik konsultatsioon mobiilside rändluse hulgihindade, mõistliku kasutuse ja jätkusuutlikkuse kohta Austatud härra Kotka Lähtudes Majandus- ja Kommunikatsiooniministeerium pöördumise st Tehnilise Järelevalve Ameti poole palvega esitada sisend Euroopa Komisjon i 26.11.2015 algatatud mobiilside rändluse ( roaming ) hulgihindade, mõistliku kasutuse ja jätkusuutlikkuse avaliku konsultatsiooni osas edastame meie poolse sisendi nimetatud konsultatisoonile. Lugupidamisega (allkirjastatud digitaalselt) Raigo Uukkivi Peadirektor Lisa: „ Public consultation on the review of national wholesale roaming markets , fair use policy and the sustainability mechanism referred to in the Roaming Regulation 531/2012 as amended by Regulation 2015/2120 “ Peeter Lutsoja 667 2002
[email protected]
Public consultation on the review of national wholesale roaming market s , fair use policy and the sustainability mechanism referred to in the Roaming Regulation 531/2012 as amended by Regulation 2015 /2120 You are invited read the background document to this consultation and fill in the online questionnaire available below. The questionnaire of the public consultation has a first section on general information from the respondent, followed by three sections, which are dedicated to the areas to be covered by the legislative act and by the implementing acts to be adopted before roam-like-at-home (RLAH) becomes applicable from 15 June 2017: National wholesale roaming markets review Fair use policy Sustainability mechanism You can skip questions that you do not feel comfortable responding to. You can also pause at any time and continue later. Once you have submitted your answers, you will be able to download a copy of your completed responses. We would expect individual consumers to be interested in replying to the questions in the 'Fair use policy' section in particular (quest ions 43 to 54 ), as well as to questions 36 to 42 on permanent roaming in the section on 'National wholesale roaming markets review'. Replies to questions marked with an asterisk are compulsory. Throughout the questionnaire, "the Regulation" refers to Regulation 2015/2120 (OJ L 310 of 26 November 2015) amending the Roaming Regulation 531/2012 (see the background document to this consultation). 1. General information * Question 1 : You answer as: Private individual Consumer association or user association Business (please specify sector) Mobile Network Operator Mobile Virtual Network Operator Other electronic communications network or service provider Internet content provider Government authority National Regulatory Authority Other public bodies and institutions (please specify) Other (please specify) Please specify business sector (if applicable) or if "other". If you answer as an individual in your personal capacity, what is your name? *If you answer as an individual in your personal capacity, what is your e-mail address? * Question 2 : Is your organisation registered in the Transparency Register of the European Commission and the European Parliament? Yes No Not applicable (I am replying as an individual in my personal capacity) If yes, please indicate your organisation's registration number in the Transparency Register. If you are an entity not registered in the Transparency Register, please register in the Transparency Register before answering this questionnaire. If your entity responds without being registered, the Commission will consider its input as that of an individual. * Please enter the name of your institution/organisation/business. Please enter your organisation's address. : … Please enter your organisation's website. … Please enter the name of a contact person. Please enter the phone number of a contact person. Please enter the e-mail address of a contact person. If you object to publication of the personal data on the grounds that such publication would harm your legitimate interests, please indicate this below and provide the reasons for such objection . * Question 3: What is your country of residence? (In case of legal entities, please select the primary place of establishment of the entity you represent) Austria Belgium Bulgaria Czech Republic Croatia Cyprus Denmark Estonia France Finland Germany Greece Hungary Italy Ireland Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Spain Slovenia Slovakia Sweden United Kingdom Other If other, please specify. 2 . R eview of national wholesale r oaming market s The Regulation imposes an obligation on operators of mobile telecommunications to not levy any surcharge in addition to the domestic retail price on a roaming customer in any Member State for any regulated roaming call made or received, for any regulated roaming SMS message sent and for any regulated data roaming services used, subject to fair use policy. A service provider that want s to offer roaming services to its customers (the 'home operator ') has to buy them from mobile network operators located in the different visited countries ('visited operators') . To this end, commercial agreements between service providers have to be concluded . The term “wholesale roaming services” refers to the provision of roaming services between service providers located in different countries. The provision of wholesale roaming services implies the payment of wholesale roaming charges from the home operator to the visited operator. The level of this wholesale roaming charge is currently regulated at EU level (Regulati on No 531/2012). The wholesale roaming charge represents the main cost of providing retail roaming services for the home operator , at least when it has a net negative wholesale balance , i.e. when the traffic of its customers roaming on foreign networks is greater than the traffic it receives from foreign customers roaming on its own domestic network . The main question s of the review of national wholesale roaming market s are whether, under the current EU R oaming R egulation, the functioning of th ese market s is sufficiently competitive to enable the abolition of retail roaming sur charges in the EU from 15 June 2017, subject to fair use policy, by the home operator , and, if not, what measures would be needed to ensure this objective . T h e questions in this section aim at gather ing views from stakeholders on the competitive situation of national wholesale roaming markets in the EU, as well as views on the main regulatory options available at the wholesale level, including on possible additional safeguards to mitigate the risks that might be associated with permanent roaming . 2 .1. Functioning of national wholesale roaming market s Under current roaming regulation, do you consider that any of the following national wholesale roaming markets are well- functioning markets in the EU ? * Voice * SMS messages * Data None It depends on the visited Member State don't know Please indicate the factor(s) showing that the market(s) is/are functioning well and provide examples W holesale markets are well- functioning under the existing roaming regulation . C urrent retail and w holesale roaming price caps guarantee sufficient margins between retail and wholesale charges , which prevent unprofitable roaming services and thereby guarantee operators incentive to provide qualitative roaming services . If the answer to Question 4 is "it depends on the visited Member State " , please indicate the Member States, if any, where, under current roaming regulation, you consider that the following wholesale roaming markets are well-functioning markets . Ei ole vaja vastata . Voice: SMS messages: Data : Don't know: If the answer to Question 4 is "it depends on the visited Member State " , please indicate what the relevant factor ( s ) influencing the functioning of the national wholesale roam ing market might be . Ei ole vaja vastata . the number of operators on the national market of the visited Member State whether the visited Member State has a positive or negative im balance of roaming traffic the size of the (positive or negative) im balance in roaming traffic of the visited Member State whether a (positive or negative) imbalance in roaming traffic of the visited Member State is concentrated in a short period of time within the year the size of the national market of the visited Member State whether one or more operators in the visited country has significant spare capacity in its network other (please specify) don't know Please explain in which direction the factor(s) identified might influence the level of competition on the national wholesale roaming market (i.e. towards more or less competition). If those factors differ across different Member States, please specify the Member States associated with the identified factors . If you find any national wholesale roaming markets to be well-functioning in response to Question 4 or 5 , please indicate , for each of them, which elements and analysis lead you to that conclusion. Comparison of retail and wholesale charges lead to the conclusion what get out roami ng service profitability or not and thereby guarantee operators incentive to provide qualitative roaming services. Due to ETRA (Estonian Technical Regula tory Authority) analysis, the existing difference between retail and wholesale charges generates the roaming service sufficient profitability and thereby guarantees operators incentive to provide qualitative roaming services. For each of the national wholesale roaming markets that you do not find well-functioning in Question 4 or 5 , if any, please indicate the obstacles to efficient functioning and/or competition that you identify in these markets . Ei ole vaja vastata . If you are a mobile operator , do you negotiate wholesale roaming prices with some other mobile operators in the context of (a) roaming alliance ( s ) ? Ei ole vaja vastata . Yes N o Don't know Please explain your response and provide examples If you are a mobile operator , please indicate for which service(s), if any, the level of negotiated prices are substantially below existing wholesale roaming price caps: Ei ole vaja vastata . voice SMS data If you are a mobile operator , d o you apply roaming traffic steering techniques (i.e. routing the traffic of your subscriber while roaming ) to one specific visited network ? Ei ole vaja vastata . Yes N o Don't know Please explain your response and provide examples If the answer to Question 11 is 'Y es ' , how much of your roaming traffic is steered towards one or more specific networks in a visited country? Ei ole vaja vastata . All traffic Only a fraction (please indicate the share of overall roaming traffic) Don't know Please explain your response and provide examples If the answer to Question 11 is 'no' or the answer to Question 12 is "only a fraction " , p lease indicate the reasons why, including technical as well as cost obstacles to full control of traffic in visited countries , or any other strategic or commercial reasons . Ei ole vaja vastata . Do you consider that Roam-Like-At-Home ( RLAH ) (i.e. the fact that roaming consumption will be charged at domestic retail price) might have an y effect on the functioning of the national wholesale roaming markets? * Yes No it depends on the visited Member State Don't know Please explain your response and provide examples ; if you consider that RLAH might have an effect on the functioning of the wholesale roaming markets, please specify which and justify It is quite possible that in case i f a current profit of retail roaming goes down or been abolished the op e rators will attempt to compensate for the loss in a wholesale level of roaming. If the answer to Question 14 is "it depends on the visited Member State " , please indicate the Member States, if any, where you expect RLAH to have an effect on the functioning of the wholesale roaming markets. Ei ole vaja vastata . MSs where it might have an effect : MSs where it might have no effect: MSs for which you don't know: If the answer to Question 1 4 is ' Y es ' , w ould you expect any of the following national wholesale roaming markets to be well-functioning markets under RLAH ? voice SMS messages data * none it depends on the visited Member State don't know Please explain your response and provide examples The o perators will be depriv ing of their present retail roaming income in every service ensuing of RLAH imposing . Therefore , they will attempt to recover revenues from wholes ale roaming in all services or they will increase the domestic prices of described services to cover the losses of roaming services. D ue to this circumstance, we are not certain that national wholesale roaming markets will be well -functioning markets under RLAH . If the answer to Question 16 is "it depends on the visited Member State " , please indicate the Member States, if any, where you expect the following national wholesale roaming markets to be well-functioning markets under RLAH. Ei ole vaja vastata . Voice: SMS messages: Data: Don't know: If you expect any of the national wholesale roaming markets to be a well-functioning market under RLAH in Question 16 or 17 , please indicate , for each of them, which elements and analysis lead you to that expectation. Ei ole vaja vastata . For each of the national wholesale roaming markets that you do not expect to be a well-functioning market under RLAH in Question 16 or 17 , if any, please indicate the obstacles to efficient functioning of and/or competition that you expect in these markets. Operators will lose in their present retail roaming income in all services: voice, SMS and data because of imposing the RLAH. Therefore , they will attempt to compensate these revenues by wholesale roaming in all services or they will increase the domestic prices of described services to cover the losses of roaming services. Do you consider that the functioning of the national wholesale roaming markets absent regulation would be capable of delivering RLAH at the retail level in accordance with the domestic charging model ? Yes * No it depends on the Member State Don't know Please explain your response and provide examples. Current practise of wholesale roaming charges shows that competition is not sufficient to press wholesale charges substantially lower than current wholesale roaming charge caps. Therefore , the wholesale roaming charges may increase without caps . If 'No' , p lease indicate what are in your view the obstacles in national wholesale roaming markets for the sustainability of RLAH at the retail level in accordance with the domestic charging model . If the operators cannot recover roaming expenses from wholesale revenue , they may increase domestic retail prices. 2. 2. M ain regulatory options at wholesale level Is the provision of retail roaming services at domestic prices, subject to a fair use policy designed to prevent anomalous or abusive use, sustainable with current wholesale roaming price caps and without changing the domestic charging model ? Yes * No it depends on the Member State Don't know Please explain your response and provide examples . Please formulate your answer by reference to wholesale prices negotiated and effectively paid. In Estonia the average retail call domestic price is 2 €cents per minute . I f the current wholesale roaming outgoing call price caps will remain 5 €cents per minute and retail roaming outgoing call will be equal to domestic prices , the every retail roaming minute bring negative profit for operator, which could ruin economic motivation to provide retail roaming services. In addition , 60-70% customers use direct sales offers where retail prices is even lower than in public retail offers. If the answer to Question 22 is "it depends on the Member State', i n which Member State ( s ), if any, do you think this would not be sustainable with current wholesale caps and without increasing domestic prices? Please explain and justify your response . Ei ole vaja vastata . What are the obstacles at wholesale level making the provision of retail roaming services at domestic prices in the EU unsustainable ? ( multiple answers possible; please indicate their order of importance below). 2. the existence of current wholesale roaming regulation 1. too high wholesale roaming caps 3. lack of effective competition in the provision of wholesale roaming services 4. too large differences in the costs of providing wholesale roaming services across Member States with respect to the diversity of domestic retail prices for mobile services across Member States lack of efficient market , preventing trade of wholesale roaming traffic in a given country at the best pricing conditions at any time 5. lack of bargaining power of smaller operators other (please specify) don't know Please rank your answers in order of importance (strongest obstacle ranked 1), explain your response and provide examples Main obstacles is too high wholesale roaming caps . I f domestic retail prices don’t cover t hese wholesale caps the operators will lose their economic motivation to provide retail roaming services . W hat would be the most appropriate of the following options at wholesale level to enable the provision of retail roaming services at domestic prices in the EU, subject to any fair use poli cy to prevent anomalous or abusive use? lift any wholesale roaming regulation keep current roaming regulation (Regulation No 531/2012) unchanged , i.e. maintain current wholesale roaming price caps * lower current wholesale roaming price caps other (please specify) don't know Please explain your response and provide examples The wholesale roaming price caps have to be lower than retail domestic prices for retain an economic motivation to provide the retail roaming services I f you consider that new wholesale roaming price caps should be defined, should these caps be: * EU-wide: the level of the wholesale roaming price cap is in the same level in all Member States country-specific: the level of the wholesale roaming price cap is different in each Member State, reflect ing the differences in the costs of providing mobile communications services in each Member State other (please specify) don't know Please explain your response and provide justifications Country-specific wholesale roaming regulation makes implementation of regulation too complicated , because it may generate a different fair use policy in different countries . In case of EU-wide new wholesale roaming price caps, should these caps be set ? * by reference to the costs of providing wholesale roaming services across the EU by a hypothetical efficient operator (i.e. an operator using the most efficient technologies and optimal operations commercially available) . by reference to the actual costs of providing wholesale roaming services across the EU by existing operators other (please specify) Don't know Please explain your response and provide examples . If you have chosen "actual costs", please indicate which sources of actual costs you would use. I n consideration of wholesale roaming in coming calls price cap s derived from regulation of termination rate in visited network which generally based on hypothetical efficient operator (pure BU LRIC cost model ) , the outgoing calls wholesale roaming caps must also be base d on same sort cost model (hypothetical efficient operator). T he Regulation sets the requirement of covering wholesale costs of operators in visited countries, and has the objective of supporting a sustainable RLAH provision at retail level in all Member States (outside specific and exceptional circumstances under which an operator may be authorised to apply retail roaming surcharges) . Please specify how you would set an EU-wide cap that meets that requirement and that objective. Please indicate which are likely to be the main practical difficulties with this option and whether and how they could be overcome. Wholesale roaming price caps shall base on costs of hypothetical efficient operator. It is the guarantee, that wholesale roaming providers’ covers theirs reasonable costs and retail roaming provider s are able to provide retail roaming with domestic prices. In case of country- specific new wholesale roaming price caps , should these caps be set for each Member State using : * a common cost model that can be populate d with country-specific inputs for each Member State a cost model developed and applied by each Member State but based on a common methodology (as, for example, is currently recommended for mobile termination rates) other (please specify) don't know Please explain your response and provide examples Common cost model is more transparent than different cost models applied by each Member State s . Please answer the following four questions irrespective of your reply to Q uestion 2 9 . In case of a common cost model that would need to be populate d with country-specific inputs for each Member State , please indicate which are likely to be the main practical difficulties with this option and how they could be overcome. No practical difficulties. In case of a cost model developed and applied by each Member State base d on a common methodology, please indicate which are likely to be the main practical difficulties with this option and how they could be overcome. It may be complicated and burdensome to assure and control, than different Member States employ cost models based on a common methodology. In defining a common methodology to estimate the costs of wholesale roaming services , please indicate which are the areas to focus on and how the common methodology should be defined. Main focus has to be define involved cost types and amounts principles. Should there be additional regulatory measure(s) to ensure the more efficient functioning of and/or competition on the national wholesale roaming market s and the sustainability of the abolition of retail roaming surcharges? Please specify, explain your response and provide examples. New regulation (EU) 2015/2120 is sufficient. If you are a mobile operator with networks in more than one Member State, please: 1) specify these Member States, 2) order these Member States by the level of network costs involved in supplying wholesale mobile roaming services (ordering the Member States from higher network costs to lower network costs), 3) group these Member States by similar levels of network costs involved in supplying wholesale mobile roaming services. Ei ole vaja vastata . Do you think that there are specific costs related to investments made in order to accommodate seasonal traffic variations derived from increased roaming demand? Yes No * Don't know If 'Yes' , please explain your response and provide examples. In particular, please specify in what circumstances additional network investment needs in areas with localised seasonal traffic peaks would be sufficiently significant to merit inclusion in a cost model based on EU-wide or country-specific costs , and how to estimate those costs 2 . 3 . P ossible risks associated with permanent roaming and possible solutions to address them The Regulation specifies that, while conducting the wholesale roaming market review, the Commission shall take into account the need to prevent permanent roaming. Permanent roaming is understood as a situation whereby a subscriber actively uses a SIM card of an operator based in country A exclusively or almost exclusively either in his country of residence, which is different from country A, or in a number of countries other than country A. What are the risks associated with permanent roaming for a mobile operator , if any ? Please explain you response and provide examples. If wholesale roaming caps is higher than retail domestic price then retail roaming provider bears remarkable losses from permanent roaming. If wholesale roaming caps is lower than actual costs then wholesale roaming provider bears remarkable losses from permanent roaming. In case you have identified risks associated with permanent roaming, s hould regulatory safeguards to mitigate those risks be foreseen in any future roaming regulation , in addition to the two included in the Regulation (i.e. fair use policy, lifting of obligation to give wholesale roaming access upon reasonable request if roaming access is sought for the purpose of permanent roaming)? Y es No * Don't know Please explain your response and provide examples If yes, which additional regulatory safeguards should be foreseen? Please explain you response and provide examples. Ei ole vaja vastata . Do you consider that there are currently or that there will be in future circumvention mechanisms for users to get around limitations on permanent roaming in the context of RLAH ? Yes No * Don't know Please explain your response and provide examples. If the answer to Question 39 is 'Yes' , please describe the se mechanisms and explain why and for which services the y would be more attractive in the context of RLAH, including possibly quantitative evidence. Ei ole vaja vastata . In case you consider measures circumventing limitations on permanent roaming as likely or more attractive in a RLAH setting , leading in particular to permanent roaming, p lease indicate how you consider this specific risk should be addressed: only at retail level only at wholesale level, in particular with safeguards against anomalous increase of demand for roaming traffic at retail and at wholesale level other s (please specify) * don't know Please explain your response and provide examples If the answer to Question 41 is "only retail" or "at retail and at wholesale level", what measure would you consider most appropriate in addition to fair use policy ? Ei ole vaja vastata . applying a minimum activation duration or minimum domestic activity before allowing pre-paid subscribers to use their roaming services (if so, please indicate the minimum activation period or domestic activity that you would apply) creating an industry database that would allow EU operators to detect and block end users using pre-paid SIM cards for permanent roaming other s (please specify) don't know Please explain your response and provide examples 3. Fair use policy Like previous EU roaming regulations, the Regulation regulates the use of roaming services when periodically travelling in the EU. The Regulation provides that from 15 June 2017 customers may consume mobile communications services (voice, SMS, data) in the same way and for the same price whether they are at home or periodically travelling abroad in the EU. In contrast, if the customer permanently stays in country A with a mobile subscription of country B , where costs and competitive conditions may be very different, this is not considered fair use of roaming services , but anomalous or abusive roaming. In order to avoid such an anomalous use of roaming services, the Regulation provides that the operator may apply a surcharge to roaming consumption in excess of fair use. More specifically, Article 6b of Regulation No 531/201 2 as amended by t he Regulation provides that " roaming providers may apply (…) a fair use policy to the consumption of regulated roaming services provided at the applicable domestic retail price level, in order to prevent abusive or anomalous usage of regulated roaming services by roaming customers " . This article also provides that " any fair use policy shall enable the roaming provider's customers to consume volumes of roaming services at the applicable domestic price that are consistent with their respective domestic tariff plans " . The set of questions in this section seeks views on the scope of fair use policies for roaming services and their formulation in practice. In particular, the replies to this set of questions will facilitate the further elaboration of the concept of periodic travel and contribute to the formulation of fair use policies on roaming consumption that ensures consistency with domestic tariff plans . Inputs will be used by the Commission when laying down detailed rules on the application of fair use policies in the Commission implementing act mandated by the Regulation . Pursuant to the Regulation, in the case of domestic tariff plans including (un)limited volumes of domestic consumption per service (voice, SMS messages, data), roaming consumption at domestic prices means that roaming consumption is included without any surcharge in the (un)limited volume of the domestic tariff plan. It is important to note that applying a fair-use policy is not an obligation imposed on mobile operators, but a possibility to which certain minimum parameters will be set by the Commission in accordance with the Regulation. You are invited to respond to the questions below , to the extent possible for you, in the light of the evolution of pricing and consumption patterns in the Member States, the degree of convergence of domestic price levels across the Union, and any observable risks of distortion of competition and investment incentives in domestic and visited markets. 3.1. General approach and scope of roaming needs to be accommodated by any fair use policy Do you think any fair use policy should take a form other than time or volume limits on the level of consumption of roaming services at domestic prices? Y es N o * Don't know If yes, please specify Limits in any fair use policy should be : : * set at the same level across the whole EU set at different levels per Member State, based on harmonised criteria at EU level applied by the operator , to ensure consistency with the respective tariff plans, in t h e light of harmonised criteria at EU level and monitored by NRAs other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples Fair use policy set at the same level across the whole EU guarantee transparent and non-discriminated roaming services for all EU citizens. What should be the general objective of fair use policy on roaming consumption at domestic prices ? F air use policy should allow for (multiple answers possible) : inadvertent roaming (the customer does not leave his/her country but may, unwillingly, be roaming due to a stronger cross-border signal in border areas) roaming needs of cross-border workers (workers residing in one Member State, usually near a border, and working on a daily basis in another Member State) * roaming needs while on frequent travel for professional purposes ( exceeding annual paid holiday duration, i.e. typically exceeding 5 weeks cumulatively per year) * roaming needs while on travel for personal purposes, e.g. holidays, tourism other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples Fewer exceptions guarantee more transparent and understandable rules. 3. 2 . Definition of the scope of periodic travel According to Article 6b of Regulation No 531/201 as amended by the Regulation the "use of [roaming] services by roaming customers in a Member State other than that of their domestic provider for purposes other than periodic travel " is considered "abusive or anomalous usage of regulated roaming services". In this section we are seeking views about how the concept of " periodic travel " should be interpreted for the purpose of identifying abusive or anomalous usage of regulated roaming services at domestic prices. Please indicate at which level you think periodic travel should be established as a minimum amount of time for fair use policy : * at EU level per Member State per operator per domestic tariff plan (e.g. possibly different for plans aimed at business users, frequent travellers, mass-market) other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples Fewer exceptions guarantee more transparent and understandable rules. I rrespective of the level at which periodic travel is established ( i.e. the EU, Member State, operator or tariff plan level) , th e definition of periodic travel should be based on a common criteri on. This criterion should refer to travelling time abroad within the EU of individuals in th e relevant group (i.e. all EU residents, all residents of the Member State, all subscribers of the operator or all subscribers of the tariff plan , respectively ). The purpose of the next questions is to identify the most appropriate criterion to define periodic travel for each of the relevant groups described in the previous question. One of the possible criteria relies on the concept of percentile which allows to define which part of each relevant group should be covered by periodic travel. The 100 th percentile means that all individuals of the group considered are covered; the 50 th percentile corresponds to the median, meaning that half of the group considered (the half travelling less) is entirely covered, while the other half (the half travelling more) is not entirely covered (i.e. individuals in this half are not covered for the days abroad in the EU that exceed those of the median of the group ) . Please answer all questions below even when they relate to the alternatives you have not selected in Question 4 6 . In case of defini ng periodic travel at EU level , w hat should be the criteri on to define periodic travel abroad in the EU on a yearly basis for the purpose of identifying abusive or anomalous usage of regulated roaming services at domestic price s ? the x th percentile annual number of days abroad within the EU of the residents of all Member States ( please specify which percenti le, a figure between 0 and 100) Example: in the case above, the 70 th percentile is a number of days abroad such that the annual number of days abroad within the EU of 70 % of the residents of all EU Member States would be covered by the definition of periodic travel in the fair use policy . This means that the annual number of days abroad within the EU of the top 30 % most travelling residents of all EU Member States would not be fully covered by the definition of periodic travel in the fair use policy . the maximum period for residing on the territory of a Member State without any condition or formality pursuant to EU applicable legislation (i.e. 3 months pursuant to Article 6(1) Directive 2004/38/EC) * the weighted average annual number of days of paid holidays to which employees are entitled by law (i.e. mandatory minimum number of paid holidays) in the EU Member States the highest annual number of days of paid holidays to which employees are entitled by law (i.e. mandatory minimum number of paid holidays) in an EU Member State (5 weeks) 183 days per year (half a year) the average annual number of working days in the EU (in order to cover the needs of cross-border workers or frequent travellers for business purposes ) the maximum annual number of working days in the EU tick th is box if you consider that intermittent travel time (i.e. travel for less than 24 hours ) should be excluded (e.g. should not count against the fair use limit) from the criterion selected above other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples, as well as indicat ing billing and implementation costs for implementing the preferred criteria if any Holiday is the main reason why most EU citizen use roaming services. So it is reasoned that periodic travel should base on weighted average annual number of days of paid holidays to which employees are entitled by law in the EU Member States. In case of defini ng periodic travel at Member State level, what should be the criteri on to define periodic travel abroad in the EU on a yearly basis for the purpose of identifying abusive or anomalous usage of regulated roaming services at domestic price? the x th percentile annual number of days abroad within the EU of the residents of the Member State of the subscriber ( please specify which percenti le, a figure between 0 and 100) Example: in the case above, the 70 th percentile is a number of days abroad such that the annual number of days abroad within the EU of 70 % of the residents of the Member State of the subscriber would be covered by the definition of periodic travel in the fair use policy. This means that the annual number of days abroad within the EU of the top 30 % most travelling residents of the Member State of the subscriber would not be covered by the definition of periodic travel in the fair use policy. * the annual number of days of paid holidays to which employees are entitled by law in the Member State of the subscriber in line with the criteria to establish residence in the Member State of the subscriber , e.g . one year (365 days) minus the minimum number of days of residence per year required to establish legal residence in the Member State of the subscriber the annual number of working days in the Member State of the subscriber (in order to cover the needs of cross-border workers or frequent travellers for business purposes) tick th is box if you consider that intermittent travel time (i.e. travel for less than 24 hours) should be excluded (e.g. should not count against the fair use limit) from the criteri on selected above other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples, as well as indicat ing billing and implementation costs for implementing the preferred criteria if any Holiday is the main reason why most EU citizen use roaming services. So it is reasoned that periodic travel should base on annual number of days of paid holidays to which employees are entitled by law in the EU Member States. In case of defini ng periodic travel at operator level, what should be the criteri on to define periodic travel abroad in the EU on a yearly basis for the purpose of identifying abusive or anomalous usage of regulated roaming services at domestic price? the x th percentile annual number of days abroad within the EU of the subscribers of the operator ( please specify which percentile, a figure between 0 and 100) Example: in the case above, the 70 th percentile is a number of days abroad such that the annual number of days abroad within the EU of 70 % of the subscribers of the operator would be covered by the definition of periodic travel in the fair use policy. This means that the annual number of days abroad within the EU of the top 30 % most travelling subscribers of the operator would not be covered by the definition of periodic travel in the fair use policy. the x th percentile annual number of days abroad within the EU of the subscribers of the tariff plan of the subscriber ( please specify which percent ile, a figure between 0 and 100) Example: in the case above, the 70 th percentile is a number of days abroad such that the annual number of days abroad within the EU of 70 % of the subscribers of the tariff plan of the subscriber would be covered by the definition of periodic travel in the fair use policy. This means that the annual number of days abroad within the EU of the top 30 % most travelling subscribers of the tariff plan of the subscriber would not be covered by the definition of periodic travel in the fair use policy. * other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples, as well as indicate billing and implementation costs for implementing the preferred criteria if any Holiday is the main reason why most EU citizen use roaming services. So it is reasoned that periodic travel should base on annual number of days of paid holidays to which employees are entitled by law in the EU Member States. 3.3. Consistency with domestic tariff plans In the previous section, we have considered the scope of " periodic travel " in terms of number of days per year. This constitutes the first parameter to be set in any fair use policy on roaming consumption at domestic prices. In the following set of questions, we are seeking views about whether and how operators could complement the design of any fair use policy formulated in those terms, so as to ensure its consisten cy with different domestic tariff plans . The scope of periodic travel is discussed in section 3 .2 on a yearly basis, in particular to accommodate for the seasonal variations of travels over the year. However, it might be possible for actual fair use limits reflecting the annual scope of periodic travel to be set for shorter periods than a year , provided the sum of those shorter period limits is equal to or higher than the annual definition of periodic travel. Please indicate the period of time over which fair use limits reflecting the scope of periodic travel establis hed in the previous section should be applied . * a year , i.e. no further temporal break-down of fair use policy. a semester a quarter a month a week a day other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples , including considerations on billing and implementation costs For example , if annual number of days of paid holidays is 28 and if it divide to 12 months this means that every months include only 2 ,3 day allowed roaming with domestic price. Such cutting doesn’t restrict significantly scope of RLAH. In the case of domestic tariff plans with a limited (fixed) volume per service (voice, SMS messages, data) , what should be the minimum share of the domestic tariff plan that should be available to the subscriber at domestic prices while periodically travelling abroad in the EU as considered in section 3 . 2 ? * 100% (the whole volume of the domestic tariff plan is available without any surcharge to the customer while periodically travelling abroad in the EU ) between 50% and 100% 50% ( i.e. half of the whole volume of the domestic tariff plan is available without any surcharge to the customer while periodic ally travel ling abroad in the EU ) less than 5 0% the percentage share should depend on the domestic tariff plan (please specify how) Please explain and justify your response , provide examples and estimates of the likely costs of implementation of the option chosen Fewer exceptions guarantee more transparent and understandable rules. In the case of a domestic tariff plan including unlimited volume of any particular service (voice, SMS messages, data), of two of these services, or of the three services, w hat should be the minimum basis for setting any limits in the fair use policy on roaming consumption of that (or those) service(s) at domestic prices avail a b le to the customer while periodically travelling abroad in the EU as considered in section 3 . 2 ? the application by analogy of any domestic fair use policy to which the nominally unlimited domestic tariff plan might be subject the roaming fair use limits allowed for in the largest fixed volume domestic tariff plan of the operator (if any) * the average daily domestic subscribers ’ consumption of the tariff plan of the subscriber other (please specify ) Please explain and justify your response, provide examples and estimates of the likely costs of implementation of the option chosen S etting any limits in the fair use the average daily domestic subscribers ’ consumption of the tariff plan provide the guarantee d that subscriber ’s feels of using roaming services abroad are the same as feels of using same services in home country. In the above two sections the formulation of possible parameters for fair use policies includes a maximum number of days per year (defining periodic travel), possibly broken down in shorter periods, and possibly complemented by limits on the volume of consumption available while roaming abroad in the EU during that maximum number of days . If you think that the minimum parameters for fair use policy sh ould be formulated differently , please specify. Ei ole vaja vastata . 3.4 . Incoming calls on pre-paid SIM cards Do you think that use of pre-paid SIMs roaming only with the purpose to receive calls should be addressed under fair use policy ? Y es * No Do not know Please explain your response and provide examples, as well as indicate possible solutions Seeing that the roaming incoming calls on pre-paid cards have same wholesale cost pattern (regulated MTRs) as incoming calls on pre-paid cards in home country (also regulated MTRs), it is not necessary to apply some additional fair use policy for roaming incoming calls on pre-paid cards . If 'Yes' , please indicate how you would address this risk Ei ole vaja vastata . 4 . Sustainability mechanism In some specific and exceptional circumstances, the provision of RLAH may affect the sustainability of an operator's domestic charging model, for example, if its domestic prices are below the prices they have to pay to the visited network operators hosting their roaming customers when travelling abroad in the EU and the operator's overall revenues are low relative to its effective roaming costs. For these exceptional cases, and in view of avoiding an increase in domestic prices, the Regulation foresees, as an exception, the possibility for these operators to still apply a surcharge to their roaming customers, subject to a prior authorisation of the national regulatory authority. To obtain this authorisation, the operator will have to provide to the national regulatory authority all the necessary information proving that the abolition of roaming surcharges would lead to its domestic charging model becoming unsustainable. The Regulation provides that the roaming surcharge applied shall however not be higher than the strict minimum necessary to recover the operator's costs of providing retail roaming services. Pursuant to the Regulation, the methodology for assessing the sustainability of the abolition of retail roaming surcharges shall be based on an analysis of : ( i ) the overall actual and projected costs of providing regulated retail roaming services by reference to the effective wholesale roaming charges for unbalanced traffic and a reasonable share of the joint and common costs necessary to provide regulated roaming services,(ii) the overall actual and projected revenues from the provision of regulated retail roaming services, (iii) the consumption of such services and of domestic services , and ( iv) the level of domestic competition, prices and revenues, and any observable risks that domestic prices would be appreciably affected by RLAH pricing. This set of questions seeks views on the appropriate methodology to be used by national regulatory authorities for assessing the sustainability or otherwise of a domestic charging model following the abolition of retail roaming surcharges and, consequently, on the necessary information to be submitted by a roaming provider to its national regulatory authority for the purposes of that assessment. All inputs will be used by the Commission when laying down detailed rules on this methodology in the Commission implementing act mandated by the Regulation . 4 .1 Determining the overall actual and projected costs from the provision of regulated retail roaming services This section seek views on how to determine the overall actual and projected costs of providing regulated retail roaming services by reference to the effective wholesale roaming charges for unbalanced traffic and a reasonable share of the joint and common costs necessary to provide regulated roaming services. T he costs of providing regulated retail roaming services , calculated by reference to the effective wholesale roaming charges for unbalanced traffic and to a reasonable share of necessary joint and common costs, can be represented as follows: Costs of providing retail roaming services=retail roaming costs+ wholesale roaming payments for unbalanced traffic (iftotal wholesale roaming payments>total wholesale roaming revenues) Retail roaming costs One way to determine retail costs of providing roaming services w ould be to obtain them from the operator's accounts . Do you think that it is an appropriate way to do so ? * Yes No Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach to estimate the retail costs of providing regulated roaming services Please indicate the categories of retail roaming costs that you consider should be included to estimate the costs of regulated retail roaming services, including a reasonable share of joint and common costs. Please provide a brief description for each category of cost and specify the different categories of costs involved. Costs of conclusion of roaming wholesale contracts . Costs of wholesale settlement (includes administration and amortisation of data system and processing of invoices). Costs of retail settlement (includes administration and amortisation of data system and processing of invoices). Total wholesale roaming payments Do you agree that wholesale roaming payments should be based on the payments for these services obtained from the operator's accounts? * Yes No Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach to estimate the wholesale roaming payments Wholesale roaming payments for unbalanced traffic Do you agree that wholesale roaming payments for unbalanced traffic should be obtained by summing up wholesale roaming payments for bilateral unbalanced traffic between the domestic operator and each individual EU operator visited by the domestic operator's customers when roaming ? Yes * No Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach to estimate the wholesale roaming payments for unbalanced traffic , as foreseen in the Regulation In order to achieve transparent and straightforward sustainable mechanism it is reasonable to apply the united sustainable mechanism , which i s u nvaried over EU and does not vary by different operators. It is reasonable that wholesale roaming payments for unbalanced traffic should be obtained of a summing up wholesale roaming payments for bilateral unbalanced traffic between the domestic operator and all EU operator s visited by the domestic operator's customers when roaming . Total wholesale roaming revenues Do you agree that wholesale roaming revenues should be based on the revenues for these services obtained from the operator's accounts? * Yes No Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach to estimate wholesale roaming revenues 4 .2 Determining the overall actual and projected revenues from the provision of regulated retail roaming services This section seek s views on how to determine the overall actual and projected revenues from the provision of regulated roaming services. Revenues from the provision of retail roaming services There are several approaches that could be used to estimate the revenues derived from the provision of retail roaming services. In principle, the revenue streams from retail roaming services that should be considered for the purpose of assessing sustainability should be composed of: In-bundle revenues (i.e. revenues derived from the use of services up to the volume limits allowed by the bundle) Out-of-bundle revenues (i.e. revenues derived from the use of services exceeding the volume limits allowed by the bundle) Out-of-fair use policy revenues (i.e. including any surcharges derived from the use of services exceeding the limits allowed by the roaming fair use policy ) Do you agree that the revenue streams from retail roaming services that should be considered for the purpose of assessing sustainability should be composed of the three types of revenues described above? * Yes No Don't know If you have responded 'No ', please indicate which other revenues from retail roaming services should be taken into account in the assessment of sustainability and/or which of the above revenue streams you believe should not be taken into account. In the case of in-bundle revenues, o ne possible approach would be to derive retail roaming revenues as a share of total domestic and roaming consumption within the bundle (i.e. the revenues derived from the bundle should be allocated pro rata between roaming and domestic consumption volumes) . Do you consider that this approach to derive in-bundle retail roaming revenues would be appropriate? * Yes No Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach to calculate actual and projected in-bundle revenues from retail roaming services In the case of bundled offers, each tariff plan typically includes certain limits of usage for each of the services (i.e. minutes of voice calls, number of SMS and Mb y t e s of data). Under RLAH the end-user will be able to consume the in-bundle volumes like at home while roaming, subject to fair use. The difficulty in assessing the share of consumption lies in the fact that the level of usage of each service may vary (e.g. an end-user may consume 100% of voice call minutes, 80% of SMS and 50% of total data allowed by the bundle). In order to estimate the share of consumption ( i ) while roaming and (ii) domestically, one possible approach to derive the share of in-bundle revenues driven by retail roaming traffic (as opposed to retail domestic traffic) is to give weights to the different volumes of services. Below we present a simplified example to illustrate this approach. For the sake of simplicity, in the example we give equal weights to each of the three services. As there are three services, an equal weight would imply a 33% weight for each (i.e. 1/3 each). In the example, the actual domestic and roaming consumption in-bundle is 92% and 8%, respectively (note that for simplicity we assume that for voice the roaming consumption occurs after the domestic consumption, resulting in 30 minutes of calls out-of-bundle, to be taken into account in a subsequent stage). Thus, in the example the in-bundle revenues of this plan (€30) should be allocated 92% to domestic consumption and 8% to roaming consumption: In other words, the weight for each roaming service is obtained as follows: SMS = (roaming consumption) /( roaming + domestic consumption) x (weight) = 5/(5+30) x 33% = 5% Do you consider that an approach using weights like the one depicted in the example above is the most appropriate to derive the share of in-bundle volumes and, subsequently, the in-bundle revenues that should be allocated to retail roaming services? Yes No * Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach to calculate the share of revenues from retail roaming services It may be one solution, but it is not sure that it is the best, as every operator usually has a numerous different bundle offers or direct sell offers and it may be too burden to analyse every bundle offer separately. In your view, with an approach using weights for every service, which of the following weights would be preferable for bundles incorporating the three main mobile services (voice, SMS, data): consider that each service (voice minutes, SMS, data) has the same weight (i.e. 33%) in the bundle of services, irrespective of the respective volume limits consider that each service (voice minutes, SMS, data) has a weight proportional to their estimated underlying cost other * don't know Please explain your response and provide examples. In the case of out-of-bundle and out-of-fair use policy revenues, do you agree that these should be based on the revenues obtained from out-of-bundle and out-of-fair use policy consumption while roaming? It should be borne in mind that out-of-bundle roaming consumption would normally be priced in the same way as out-of-bundle volumes for domestic consumption, whereas out-of-fair use policy roaming consumption would be subject to a maximum surcharge on top of the applicable domestic rate (whether in-bundle or out-of-bundle, depending on the circumstances). * Yes No Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach to estimate out-of-bundle and out-of-fair use policy retail roaming revenues In the case of dual-, triple- or quadruple-play bundles, some of the in-bundle revenues c ould be associated with services unrelated to roaming (e.g. fixed telephony, pay-TV or fixed broadband). In your opinion, what would be the best approach to estimate the share of revenues related to mobile services (which, subsequently, would have to be allocated to roaming and domestic consumption, as described in the previous questions): consider that each service (fixed telephony, mobile telephony, pay-TV and/or broadband) has the same weight (i.e. 1 /( number of services in the bundle)) in the bundle of services consider that each service (fixed telephony, mobile telephony, pay-TV and/or broadband) has a weight proportional to their estimated underlying cost consider that each service (fixed telephony, mobile telephony, pay-TV and/or fixed broadband) has a weight proportional to the price of an offer from the same operator providing the service on a standalone basis (if any) other * don't know Please explain your response and provide examples. 4 .3 Actual and projected time series to be considered to assess sustainability of a domestic charging model under RLAH Application for derogation from the RLAH regulation before its implementation In the case of an application before the implementation of RLAH, the period of the projected time series used to assess sustainability should be: 6 months * one year two years three years other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples A year includes all seasons and therefore guarantee s that all different travel periods are covered. In the case of an application before the implementation of RLAH, please explain on which basis would the operator assess the impact of RLAH on the roaming traffic of its customers (i.e. the price-elasticity of demand for roaming following the elimination of roaming surcharges imposed by RLAH): * based on the impact on the demand for roaming of previous rounds of price reductions imposed by the Roaming Regulations * based on the impact on the demand for roaming of the introduction by that operator of a RLAH-type of offer before the implementation of the RLAH obligation * based on the impact on the demand for roaming of the introduction by another operator of a RLAH-type of offer before the implementation of the RLAH regulation based on the impact on the demand for domestic services of previous changes in the prices of the operator's domestic tariff plans it would not be possible to estimate the impact on demand for roaming of the introduction of the RLAH regulation other (please specify) Please justify your response and explain how you consider the operator could overcome any difficulties in estimating the impact on demand of the introduction of the RLAH obligation All above marked three solution is feasible and final solution depends which data is the most comparable with specific situation. Application for derogation from the RLAH regulation after its implementation In the case of an application after the implementation of RLAH, the period of the actual time series data after the implementation of RLAH used to assess sustainability should be at least: no actual time series data should be needed to assess sustainability 3 months 4 months 6 months * one year other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples One year includes all seasons and therefore guarantees that all different travel periods is covered. In the case of an application after the implementation of RLAH, the total period of the projected time series data used to assess sustainability should be: no projected time series data should be needed to assess sustainability 6 months * one year two years three years other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples One year includes all seasons and therefore guarantees that all different travel periods is covered. In the case of an application after the implementation of RLAH, please explain on which basis would the operator assess the impact of RLAH on the roaming traffic of its customers (i.e. the price-elasticity of demand for roaming following the elimination of roaming surcharges imposed by RLAH): * based on the impact on the demand for roaming of previous rounds of price reductions imposed by the Roaming Regulations * based on the impact on the demand for roaming from the subscribers of that operator of the introduction of the RLAH obligation only * based on the impact on the demand for roaming from the subscribers of all operators in the market of the introduction of the RLAH based on the impact on the demand for domestic services of previous changes in the prices of the operator's domestic tariff plans other (please specify) Please justify your response and explain how you consider the operator could overcome any difficulties in estimating the impact on demand of the introduction of the RLAH obligation All above marked three solution is feasible and final solution depends which data is the most comparable with specific situation. 4 .4 Assessment of sustainability of a domestic charging model under RLAH There are several methodologies that could be used to assess the sustainability of a domestic charging model. A possible approach would be to ( i ) estimate the net margin (revenues minus costs) on regulated retail roaming services (' retail roaming margin') following the implementation of RLAH; and, where the latter is negative, (ii) estimate the net margin on domestic services ('domestic margin'); and (iii) compare the domestic margin to the negative retail roaming margin to assess the potential impact on the evolution of the operator's domestic prices (so-called "waterbed effect"), if any. Do you agree that the most appropriate methodology to assess sustainability would be to compare the ' retail roaming margin' (if negative) and the 'domestic margin'? * Yes No Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach When all operators active in a market are similarly impacted by a structural change potentially affecting their margins on an aspect of their activities, such as for example the introduction of RLAH, it may be argued that these operators may have a greater incentive to adapt their tariffs to compensate for the potential negative margins than if the change was asymmetric (i.e. only affecting one or some of the operators active in the market, or affecting some significantly more than others). In the latter case, any attempt to increase prices by the affected company would be likely to fail when faced by competition from other companies that were not affected, or less affected, by such change of circumstances. However, the ability of companies affected by a symmetric structural change, such as RLAH, to adapt their domestic charging model and "pass on" increases in prices to its customers to compensate for any potential negative retail roaming margin following the implementation of RLAH will also be somewhat limited by other factors. In your opinion, should the limitation to "pass on" an increase in domestic prices to customers to compensate for a potential negative margin from the implementation of RLAH be taken into account when assessing the sustainability of the domestic charging model: Yes * No Don't know Please justify your response. If your answer is "Yes ", please explain how this should be taken into account when assessing sustainability I f operator has to provide the retail roaming services with negative margin i t could ruin an economic motivation to provide qualitative retail roaming services. In light of the level of competition in EU telecommunications markets, and of differences between operators (e.g. in geographic scope of operations, customer base, etc.), if the implementation of RLAH resulted in a negative retail roaming margin for certain operators, what share of this loss would in your view be passed on through price increases in its domestic charging model: * 100% 80-99% 60-79% 40-59% 20-39% 1-19% 0% Please explain your response and provide examples, if necessary citing any relevant differences between countries or operators. It ruin s economic motivation to provide qualitative retail roaming services if operator has to provide retail roaming services with negative margin. In your opinion, taking into account your view in Question 72 on the limitations on an operator's ability to pass increases in prices on to its customers to compensate for potential losses from the implementation of RLAH, should an operator's domestic charging model be considered unsustainable if it results in a negative retail roaming margin and the proportion of this negative margin when compared to the domestic margin is at least (in absolute terms): Proportion= Retail roaming margin Domestic margin 5% 10% 15% 20% * other (please specify) Please explain your response and provide examples. If you consider that a fixed proportion would not adequately reflect variations in objective factors such as high or low domestic prices or margins, consumption levels or pass-on possibilities, please indicate the alternative approach that you would favour. It is not reasonable to force operator s to provide roaming retail services with negative margin , as i t ruins economic motivation to provide qualitative retail roaming services. 4 .5 Estimating the 'retail roaming margin' and the 'domestic margin' Once the costs of, and revenues from, providing retail roaming services have been calculated using the methodology described above in sections 4.1 and 4 .2 , the retail roaming margin can be calculated as follows : Retail roaming margin=revenues from retail roaming services - costs of providing retail roaming services The 'retail roaming margin' can then be compared to the 'domestic margin' according to the meth odology established in section 4 .4. The following questions seek views on how to estimate the 'domestic margin'. There are different methodologies that could be used to estimate the domestic margin. For simplicity, one possible approach would be to use a financial measure from the operator's annual reports. Do you consider that using a financial from the operator's annual reports to estimate the domestic margin would be appropriate? * Yes No Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach to estimate the domestic margin If the domestic margin was estimated using a financial measure from the operator's annual reports, which financial would be the most appropriate? EBITDA * EBIT After tax profit other (please specify) don't know Please explain your response and provide examples C apital costs ( amortisation and interests) are important cost s for retail roaming services also, therefore these h ave to be considered for domestic margin too . If the domestic margin was estimated using a financial measure from the operator's annual reports, this financial would already incorporate the roaming margin. In order to avoid double counting, do you agree that the retail roaming margin estimated using the methodology above should be subtracted (if positive) or re-introduced (if negative) from the financial estimate? * YES NO Don't know If you have responded 'No', please explain your response and provide an alternative approach