broadband strategies handbook.pdf - Khazar University

landing in Nigeria, the NCC recently found that a highly competitive marketwith multiple cable systems is developing (box 3.3; see NCC 2010).Facilities-based competition in the international connectivity marketsmay not be feasible in all developing countries, especially those that generatesmall amounts of traffic. Also, landlocked countries or isolated smallisland developing states (SIDSs) may not have access to submarine cablesand may have to rely on the use of alternative technologies, such as satellites,that often carry a higher price premium.For countries without a well-functioning international connectivitymarket, targeted ex ante regulation may be required to address market failure(Hernandez, Leza, and Ballot-Lena 2010). Some countries, such asIndia, Colombia, and Singapore, have adopted various obligations on internationalgateways, landing stations, and submarine cable systems (for India,TRAI 2007a; for Colombia and Singapore, IDA 2008). In Colombia, forBox 3.3: Co mpetition Analysis in the InternationalInternet Connectivity Market in NigeriaIn its 2010 review of competition in the international Internet connectivitymarket, the NCC found that this market was sufficiently competitive on aforward-looking basis and therefore did not require ex ante regulatory intervention.This determination was based on an expected increase in facilitiesbasedcompetition by 2012, stemming from the landing of four additionalsubmarine cables, one of which is to be operated on an open-access basis.In its analysis, the NCC recognized that for the better part of the last decadethe market had been dominated by NITEL, which since 2011 was themonopoly operator of Nigeria’s only submarine cable, the South Atlantic3/West Africa Submarine Cable (SAT-3/WASC). During this time, competingproviders added only limited extra capacity of their own, mostly via satellitelinks and limited terrestrial links. At the time of the market analysis, four newsubmarine cables were scheduled to commence service in Nigeria: two in2010 (Globacom-1 and Main One) and two more within the next two years(the West Africa Cable System in 2011 and the Africa Coast to Europe in2012). The NCC noted that the new cables would result in a 33-fold increasein Nigeria’s international bandwidth and significantly change the competitivedynamics in the market. As a result, it concluded that any market powerNITEL had been able to exercise in the past should be resolved as competitorsenter the market.Source: Telecommunications Management Group, Inc.Law and Regulation for a Broadband World 113