Zinjong the pilot number of two places to carry out timely promotion can optimize the market structure

Zhou Guangbin At present, China's operators accounted for a large gap in the market share, the implementation of the number portability policy has become a major regulatory department strategy. So, can the number carry really improve the current situation of China's market imbalance? What details should be paid attention to in advancing the policy? This article from this angle to analyze the special writing Zhou Guangbin days ago, the Ministry of Industry and Information technology approved in Tianjin, Hainan two places to carry out mobile user number pilot work, this may be China telecom operators between the start of the transfer network.　　This is not only one of the supporting measures to implement the telecom reform, but also an active regulatory measure to the current imbalance of telecom market structure. The number is widely used worldwide, the effect is obvious worldwide, number-carrying is not a new business.　　With the number-carrying business in South Africa in 2008, there are more than 40 countries/regions that operate in the world, and some are following up, including emerging countries such as India, Brazil and China. It should be said that the number portability is a special significance of the telecommunications system and business.　　The response is positive and positive in the context of the business that has been practised offshore. For example, the United States, the first to introduce the system, in the first 1.5 hours, 5% of the users handled the number to carry; in Japan, NTT DoCoMo, KDDI (AU) and soft silver mobile users, the use of the system with the number of transfer in the first week to reach 200,000 people, one months to break through 500,000 people , about 6% of people use the system to replace operators within a year; About 1.6 million mobile users in the UK have replaced their operators with the original number in a year; Spain, the Netherlands and Denmark are 530,000, 250,000 and 21.　　40,000. The Korean number portability policy is very personal and very successful. In 2004, the Korean government implemented the number portability policy on a time difference: forcing the largest mobile operator, Skt, to carry out the number-carrying policy first in January 2004. Subsequently, KTF was requested to implement the policy from July 1, 2004, and the LGT telecommunications company was finally required to provide the number-carrying business from January 2005 onwards. A year later, the mobile telecommunications market in Korea has undergone positive changes in 36 million of mobile users, about 8% of the users under the number portability strategy to replace a better business provider, the three major mobile operators in Korea market share has undergone a certain change. By the end of 2005, LGT Telecom, the smallest mobile operator, had attracted around 1.06 million users from two major carriers, with a total of 6.01 million subscribers. Over the same period, Skt's market share was 51. 3%, it fell by 3% compared to the number-carrying policy; KTF was 32. 5%, the market share is slightly lower than before, and LGT's market share has increased from 14. 4% rose to 16.　　5%. There are also countries around the practice has also proved that the implementation of mobile numbers can be carried, brought great social benefits. According to the UK's former telecoms regulator 0FTEL in 1998, mobile numbers bringThe net social benefit is 98 million pounds; Hong Kong 0FTA 1998, the implementation of mobile number can be carried, the overall reduction in service costs and the net social benefits brought about by 7. 69~13. HK $9.6 billion. A spokesman for the Hong Kong Telecommunications Authority said: "The introduction of a number portability business will promote fair and effective competition in the mobile phone market and will bring a net present value of 4 to the Hong Kong community over the next 10 years." 6.1 billion yuan of income. Japanese estimates show that after introducing mobile numbers in Japan, the benefits to direct users are 3.7 billion ~855 billion yen  about 2. 5.9 billion ~59. 8.5 billion Yuan , the benefit for indirect users is 199.5 billion ~2850 billion  about 139. 6.5 billion ~199. 500 million Yuan , for all mobile phone users to bring the benefit of 269.6 billion yen  about 188.　　7.2 billion Yuan , the total income is at least higher than the cost of about 14 billion yuan. The market has also given a positive response to the policy of the transfer network that will be formally implemented in our country. Huatai Securities Research Report that if we implement one-way portability policy, China Mobile stock users to use the policy of the user ratio will be higher than the first year of Korea's level, is expected to reach about 10%. From the results of the initial survey of the operators, the implementation of the policy directly indicates that the number of users will be transferred to the net of 8% of the total number of users. In addition, because China Unicom's network is a GSM network, and the same as China Mobile, users do not need to replace the terminal can be transferred to the network, the cost of switching to a significantly lower than to China Telecom. As a result, more users are expected to switch to Unicom.　　It can be said that if the number portability can achieve even more than the above forecast, to improve our current telecommunications market structure is very favorable. China should promote the number-carrying list in accordance with national conditions in order to carry out the number carrying business of trial in Hainan and Tianjin, they belong to different mode of carrying. Hainan is carrying out one-way, that is, China Mobile users can retain the number to the Chinese telecom and China Unicom, while the other operators will not be carrying the number of users to China Mobile; Tianjin is a two-way carrying mode, the user can transfer between any two operators. However, the TD Special section of the two places 157/188 users can not be carried to other networks.　　These two models, in the end which is more suitable for our country, after a period of testing, the market will give a clear answer. It can be seen that the telecommunications Department of the good and bitter intentions is to protect the normal development of TD. Firstly, the GSM mobile market in our country is mature, but the market share of each operator is quite different. The implementation number can carry, is advantageous to the market competition relative equality, is advantageous to the market share achieves the relative equilibrium.　　The government hopes to gradually weaken the market influence of the dominant operators and narrow the market gap by introducing some asymmetric control policies. However, international experience shows that the implementation of the system of number portability cannot be achieved overnight. France began its trial on June 30, 2003, but it was not fully implemented until 2006, and it took three years to complete it.。　　Japan April 27, 2004 announced the introduction of the final report of the Belt Transfer Network, November 1, 2006 formally implemented with the transfer system. There are many reasons why it takes time to carry a number. The first is the technical level. From the perspective of foreign practice, the implementation of the user's smooth transfer network, mobile operators must be as short as possible "leave" and "accept" the two process of contract processing time, simplify the number can carry the system, so that the number of users can only contact a window, that is, contact the new operator on it At the same time, operators also need to improve the technical call routing procedures so that the number can be carried the same application of other new services, followed by the cost. The realization number can carry the business, for those enterprise user, the change operator causes the telephone number changes and so on, may bring the mobile operator the cost enhancement. According to the United States, the implementation of the number-carrying policy in 4 years will bring U.S. operators a cost of 20 billion U.S. dollars, only to import the system after the second year of maintenance costs of about 500 million U.S. dollars each year, and finally the market resistance can not be belittled. In general, the largest mobile operators in the market have an instinctive resistance to the system of transfer. Because they are most likely to be adversely affected by the business, they have to take a variety of measures to retain their customers and keep the market. Therefore, in the implementation of China's transfer system, the regulatory authorities should pay close attention to operators, especially the largest operators of every move.