War over spectrum allocation

 upset with the way the department of telecommunications has allocated spectrum for mobile operators. In a missive to the Telecom Commission chairman, and then to the prime minister, he has ripped through the department’s move to link spectrum allocation with technology and subscriber base. Gauging the seriousness of Tata’s allegations, and the fact that it has the potential to derail their ambitions, the GSM operators too have gone into an overdrive, with their association and the individual operators all sending rejoinders to whoever cares to listen. A spectrum war has begun. As the subscriber base has grown, the operators have been unable to meet the service quality, so they claim, due to the inadequate spectrum. However, since most of the spectrum in this country is held by defence forces, it is impossible for the government to make it available to operators at one go, as is done internationally. So the government allots additional spectrum “based on a subscriber linked criteria, keeping in mind the optimal use of this resource and taking into account all relevant aspects such as technology specific requirements, traffic guidelines, number of base stations, etc.” This has resulted in 2:1 allotment criteria for GSM and CDMA operators, which means for an equal number of subscribers, CDMA operators are allotted half the spectrum given to GSM. It is easy to punch holes in DoT’s reasoning. It is no secret that operators have been exaggerating their subscriber base to bolster not only their claim to greater bandwidth, but also to make a marketing pitch and impress existing and prospective investors. Then there are allegations in case of one GSM and one CDMA operator that their phenomenal subscriber growth was fuelled by fictitious numbers used to show incoming international calls as being locally generated to avoid paying the huge ADC. With all this, and the absence of any independent agency to verify subscriber-base claims, it seems absurd that subscriber number was made one of the important criteria for additional spectrum allocation. Tata’s grouse seems justified.