{"id":159922,"date":"2021-08-13T06:00:00","date_gmt":"2021-08-13T11:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ict-pulse.com\/?p=159922"},"modified":"2021-08-12T19:37:05","modified_gmt":"2021-08-13T00:37:05","slug":"should-caribbean-countries-actively-try-to-increase-the-number-of-providers-in-their-telecoms-markets","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ict-pulse.com\/2021\/08\/should-caribbean-countries-actively-try-to-increase-the-number-of-providers-in-their-telecoms-markets\/","title":{"rendered":"Should Caribbean countries actively try to increase the number of providers in their telecoms markets?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Many Caribbean countries have been stuck in duopolies for over a decade, and to varying degrees, seem eager to have new players in markets to make them more dynamic and competitive, to increase the choice available to consumers, and to drive down prices.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although the specifics might differ, the general experience is more or less the same. Starting in the early 2000s, when Caribbean countries, particularly in the English-speaking Caribbean,  sought to move away from the monopoly arrangements they had for their telecoms sectors, to a more open and competitive environment, there was interest, particularly for the then underdeveloped and more cost-effective to deploy mobile\/cellular segment. Many were able to license more than two new entrants, but over time, mergers and acquisitions occurred, which has resulted in most countries having just two main players, which own and operate much of the infrastructure in-country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

International best practice did not work in the region<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Based on the telecoms environments that existed in developed countries, which was considered best practice, many Caribbean countries established licensing structures that were two-tiered. Essentially, licensing structured comprised: (i) for the handful of carriers that owned the infrastructure and provided services on a wholesale basis to other telecoms companies, and they may also deliver retail services to end-users, and (ii) for the relatively numerous virtual network operators (VNOs) that did not own infrastructure, but bought network access and services from carriers, in order to deliver retail services to end-users.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A market comprising a few carriers and multiple VNOs, was favoured, and was considered win-win. It maximised use of the existing infrastructure \u2013 for which the carriers would be paid \u2013 whilst also fostering (robust) competition in the retail services segment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Based on core economic principles, fully competitive markets are the goal: the optimal state for any market. Regulation becomes important as a means to mimic competitive forces, which might currently be absent. However, a fully competitive market is one that operates efficiently, and with minimal regulatory intervention. Among other things, competition tends to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n