Response to Public Consultation

on a

Review of the functioning of the Regulation (EC) No 717/2007 (the “ Regulation”) and its possible extension to SMS and data roaming services

General experience of the functioning of the Regulation

Question 1

To what extent do you consider that the Regulation has achieved its objectives (as described above) in relation to the following core elements of the Regulation:

(i) reduction of retail prices to acceptable levels (the Euro-tariff and its opt-out provisions) (Art. 4);

Meteor Mobile Communications Ltd (Meteor) has reduced all roaming charges in compliance with the requirements of the Regulation.

(ii) transparency of retail prices (Article 6);

Article 6 of the Regulation outlines in detail the obligations that an operator has in respect to provision of information to end users. The article includes a specific obligation on operators to provide an automatically generated message service with personalised pricing information applying to the making and receiving of calls when roaming. This message should be received by subscribers when entering a Member State other than that of the home network. Further information can be requested by means of access through a free phone number and general awareness measures on pricing are specified.

All obligations as outlined above have been met by Meteor, however, it should be noted that at the time of the introduction of the Regulation Meteor’s network was not provisioned to supply the automatic SMS message service as stipulated in the above Article.

To be in a position to provide this service, Meteor had to tender, design, install, test and finally deploy an appropriate solution. Installing the platform, which was nine months in development, was a significant undertaking for smaller operator and, further to extensive tests, was finally deployed in March 2008.

(iii) Reduction of wholesale prices (Article 3); and

In advance of the introduction of the Regulation, Meteor highlighted to the institutions of the European Union the positive impact that a Regulation capping wholesale prices could have on the development of competition within the international voice roaming market in Europe as smaller

2 operators were being disadvantaged by the stranglehold that larger operators enjoyed within the wholesale market.

Meteor maintained that ensuring wholesale access on a more equitable basis would safeguard a smaller operator’s ability to compete within this market, would ensure competition and would ultimately allow operators to offer competitive retail tariffs.

Meteor, therefore, welcomed the introduction of a reduced charge at the wholesale level, ensuring as it does some security for a smaller operator to compete.

Meteor notes that the capped wholesales prices still provide some degree of flexibility for operators to competitively price within this market and indeed Meteor has successfully negotiated volume discount agreements (VDAs) within this price cap which, in the case of the T-Mobile deal in the UK, has translated into lower retail tariffs.

(iv) Supervision and enforcement of compliance, including dispute resolution (Article 7, 8 and 9)

Since the introduction of the Regulation, Meteor has complied with all data and information requests as required by the national regulatory authority in Ireland, the Commission for Communications Regulation, (ComReg).

Question 2 To what extent has the Regulation produced unintended consequences for mobile customers, whether in terms of the availability or quality of retail roaming services and/or the amount of information provided to end users by their mobile operators?

Meteor is unaware of any unintended consequences of the roaming regulation for the mobile customer.

Question 3 How have tariffs for making and receiving voice roaming calls on the basis of tariffs other than the Eurotariff evolved since entry into force of the Regulation? Are these tariffs more advantageous for customers than the Eurotariff offered by their mobile operator? Please supply data which illustrate your reply.

Meteor has not introduced additional tariffs to the Eurotariff since the introduction of the Regulation, however, in advance of the introduction of the Eurotariff Meteor successfully introduced highly competitive roaming rates on the T-Mobile network in the UK. Prices for Meteor customers when roaming on the T-Mobile network in the UK remain significantly lower than those imposed through the Regulation’s retail caps.

3 Question 4 What has been the impact of the Regulation, on mobile operators, in terms of revenues, volumes, profits, innovation etc?

Revenue The impact of the regulation change has seen an average rate per call reduction for Meteor subscribers of 54% and an average rate per call reduction for visiting roamers of 47%.

Volumes Volume of calls per Meteor subscriber have seen a modest increase for voice traffic and the average number of visitor minutes has also slightly increased, however, Meteor would be wary of attributing these changes solely to the adoption of the International Roaming Regulation.

Please note that over the last year Meteor has introduced a number of new CAMEL agreements (real time billing for pre-pay customers) and observed significant changes to the Meteor customer profile, both of which will influence volume increases. In this context, therefore, it is not possible to attribute changes solely to one regulatory intervention.

Profit Please note that Meteor is unable to identify the true impact of the Regulation with respect to profit. There exist a number of variables to consider that cannot be identified separately.

Question 5 Since the adoption of the Regulation have there been any instances of the termination of threat of termination of wholesale roaming agreements or the refusal to negotiate new ones?

Previous to the adoption of the Regulation it would be true to say that Meteor experienced both refusal to supply and severe delays in negotiating and concluding wholesale roaming agreements. Since the adoption of the Regulation, however, whilst Meteor does continue to experience some delay in finalising the above, this could be attributed more to normal market conditions than a reluctance to provide access.

Please note that Meteor does enjoy roaming agreements (voice, SMS and other data services) with at least one operator in all Member States of the EU.

4 Inadvertent Roaming

Question 6 What measures could be taken to avoid the adverse effects of inadvertent roaming, whether by means of voluntary cooperation between operators or by means of regulatory or legislative action?

Although not a general feature of the mobile market, Meteor and mobile operators in general do acknowledge that inadvertent roaming can occasionally occur along border regions. Mobile radio transmissions do not respect geographical borders. Minimising this risk is, however, the responsibility and challenge faced by all operators when configuring networks in these areas.

Meteor is, therefore, continually engaged in monitoring the network by means of drive tests to ensure that this risk is kept to an absolute minimum.

Question 7 If you are an operator, what measures (technical or otherwise) have you taken to deal with the issue of inadvertent roaming both to prevent it happening and to compensate for the adverse effects once it has been shown to have occurred? How do you raise awareness of the problem and the potential remedies on the part of your customers?

As stated above, mobile operators do acknowledge that inadvertent roaming can occur along border regions and Meteor does accept that there have been a reported number of instances of inadvertent roaming in the border areas between Northern Ireland and the . Any reported instance of inadvertent roaming is, however, addressed both from a technical and customer experience perspective.

In the Irish case, commercial and political pressure to provide competitively placed all Ireland mobile tariffs contributed to the launch of Meteor’s new Northern Ireland and UK T-Mobile price plans. Launched in September 2006, the deal saw the introduction of highly competitive roaming rates for Meteor customers when roaming on the T-Mobile network in Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

Whilst Meteor would stress that the T-Mobile deal was not a direct consequence of any particular instance of inadvertent roaming, it did act as a commercial response from Meteor to the issue of all Ireland tariffing. Since the launch of this special tariff we have noted a significant decrease in customers contacting our Customer Care centres on the issue of inadvertent roaming. We believe this is in part due to our tariff initiative but also due to consumers being aware that they can control inadvertent roaming through the use of manual network selection.

What should be noted about this deal is that despite the fact that Meteor is the only operator active within the Republic of Ireland without a UK foot-print, commercially driven negotiation saw Meteor offering the most competitive rates in the market place. Meteor was also the only network in the Republic of Ireland to completely abolish all charges for pre-pay customers to receive calls while roaming in the UK.

5 Question 8 What has been the impact on mobile users and service providers of the implementation of the Regulation as far as roaming within, from or between the outermost regions is concerned?

Meteor is compliant with all aspects of the Regulation and the Eurotariff is available for Meteor subscribers when roaming in all areas of the EEA, including the outermost regions.

Question 9 What additional measures (if any) have been taken by the Member States or their NRAs to address roaming between the outermost regions and other parts of the EU? n/a

Impact on smaller operators

Question 10 What has been the financial impact (revenues, costs, profits, volumes etc) on smaller mobile telephony providers of the application of the Regulation since its entry into force on 30 June 2007? Please provide financial data and any other information in this respect wherever possible (which will be treated as confidential if so requested).

Please note Meteor’s response to Question 4.

In addition to the comments provided in respect to revenue and volumes, it should be noted that the introduction of the Regulation adversely affected the ability of Meteor to continue with a number of significant internal projects: the result of which was the delayed introduction of a steering of roaming platform.

Whilst Meteor has to date seen some positive effects in respect to wholesale access, regulatory intervention can never be assessed solely in isolation (i.e. with respect to an analysis of one element of the mobile market), it’s impact being felt across the business in general. A cautious approach should therefore be taken when contemplating or arguing for regulatory intervention.

Question 11 Has any operator encountered problems when seeking to agree a wholesale roaming agreement with an operator in another Member State? What kind of problems were these (e.g. for SMS inter-working)? Were they resolved in the end? Was the issue referred to an NRA? If so, what action has been taken or is in train to address those problems.

Please note Meteor’s comments in respect to Question 5.

6 Traffic steering

Question 12 To what extent is the use of traffic steering accompanied by a lower retail price for the roaming customer? Where lower roaming prices are conditional upon the use of a preferred visited network, how effective is the traffic steering in practice in ensuring that the preferred network is used? Please provide detailed data where possible.

In June 2008 Meteor introduced a steering of roaming platform. This platform can be used to directly position Meteor subscribers on a preferred network where Meteor has negotiated preferential wholesale rates and subsequently launched attractive retail offerings. In addition, it is increasingly being used as an effective tool within negotiations on access at a wholesale level and can play a role in the delivery of VDAs.

Given the fact, however, that Meteor has only just introduced an automatic steering platform practice to date has been to encourage subscribers to “self steer”. By “self steer” Meteor will highlight to subscribers the most preferential rates and networks on which to roam: one example of which is the roaming agreement between Meteor and T-Mobile in the UK.

To ensure that Meteor subscribers can avail of the most preferential rates available, subscribers are guided through the process of manually selecting a specific network. In the case of the NI/UK roaming deal this translates as information on how to manually select the T-Mobile network when roaming within the UK.

Question 13 What techniques are applied to implement traffic steering in practice? Is the roaming customer informed in advance about the steering and does he have the possibility to override it.

See above answer with reference to self steering practice.

Please note that even with the existence of a steering platform, all subscribers have the ability to manually override the steered network selected and opt for a network of choice.

7 Impact on domestic prices

Question 14 Have you identified any significant effects on domestic prices or changes in an operator’s tariff structure for domestic voice calls or other mobile services introduced after or shortly before the entry into force of the Regulation? If so, please explain providing details of the changes in terms of timing, scope, and prices.

International roaming tariffs have not impacted Meteor current pricing offers either at national or international level.

Meteor is constantly reviewing, refining and developing competitively priced national price plans to effectively compete and drive competition within the domestic market. The application of the regulation on roaming has not impacted our desire to offer competitive national pricing and to challenge larger operators’ dominance in the domestic market. It should be acknowledged, however, that compliance with the requirements of the Regulation, in particular the automated transparency measure, has significantly impacted our development resources and consequently delayed the implementation of new pricing and product innovations on the national market.

Impact on international roaming arrangements with operators in third countries

Question 15 What, if any, has been the impact of the Regulation on reciprocal roaming arrangements between EU/EEA mobile operators and their counterparts in other third countries?

Meteor is not aware of any impact from the regulation on reciprocal roaming arrangements between Meteor and counterparts in third countries.

Question 16 Have any Community-based providers of mobile roaming services negotiated agreements with third country operators concerning a reduction of wholesale roaming tariffs comparable to those set up in the Regulation?

Meteor has been able to negotiate a limited number of deals with third country operators at levels below those imposed through the EU Roaming Regulation.

8 Actual v Billed minutes

Question 17 Please provide details of changes from per second to per minute billing for voice roaming services which have occurred since or shortly before the entry into force of the Regulation. Were customers informed of those changes in advance? Have practices for new customers changed? What are the common billing practices for domestic and roaming calls?

Prior to the introduction of the Regulation Meteor pre-paid subscribers roaming on networks where Meteor had introduced CAMEL billing (i.e. real time billing) a minimum charge interval of 1 st minute applied. After this first minute voice roamers were then charged on a per second basis.

On all other networks a system of TAP (Transferred Account Procedure) + 15% billing applied. Please note that these TAP files were rated as per the tariffs charged by the visited operator and various billing increments applied from per second, to a minimum of 30 seconds, to a minimum of 1 minute to make a call. It should be noted that the majority of operators charged in increments of at least a minimum of one minute. Per second billing applied for receiving calls.

At a wholesale level billing increments varied depending on the network, with most operators billing on a 1 minute minimum duration.

Since the introduction of the Regulation Meteor has charged customers voice roaming within the EEA on the basis of 1st minute and then a 30 second call duration. This is applied to both calls made and calls received. These charging increments are also applied to CAMEL networks outside of the EEA.

On all other partner networks, TAP +15% billing still applies. Please note that as these TAP files were rated as per the tariffs charged by the visited operator various billing increments, ranging from per second, to a minimum of 30 seconds, through to a minimum of 1 minute call duration are applied.

On a wholesale basis, per minute billing applies for all EEA networks.

Please note that Meteor makes every effort to ensure that customers are aware of charging intervals adopted, details of pricing increments are included in all written correspondence with subscribers and on Meteor’s web page: www.meteor.ie

Standard domestic calls are charged on a per second basis.

9 Question 18 Do you consider that steps should be taken to ensure that the billing methodology applied to regulated roaming calls guarantees per second rather than per minute billing? If so, what action would be required (i.e. should this be left to the industry to tackle via self-regulation; should the Member States or NRAs intervene under existing powers and responsibilities; or is legislative action at Community level necessary)?

Meteor would maintain that determination of billing increments in general should be left to the market and specifically the operator to resolve. Operators must be in a position to establish the best and most appropriate method of billing customers that reflects the internal practices of the company.

Therefore, Meteor would argue that further intervention in this area of business practice would result in a micro-management of the market at a level unprecedented in Europe.

Retail pricing obligations

Question 19 Do you think it necessary to maintain the provisions of the Regulation dealing with retail prices for roaming services – in particular the mandatory Eurotariff – beyond the current expiry date of the Regulation in June 2010? If yes, why; and if not, why not?

Meteor has never argued for the imposition of retail price caps within the international roaming market. Meteor would maintain that the imposition of a retail price cap is unjustified and runs contrary to best practice in international regulation.

In advance of the introduction of the roaming Regulation Meteor made the case that, at that time, prices at the wholesale level were acting as a barrier to efficient competition within the international voice roaming market. This was particularly felt by smaller operators and those operators lacking a pan-European footprint: as ultimately such operators were more exposed to the wholesale pricing strategies of larger more dominant players.

Ultimately, Meteor maintained that the imposition of a wholesale price cap would allow a smaller operator to compete effectively at the retail level without the need for further regulatory intervention.

Whilst the introduction of a wholesale price cap has ensured to some degree access to more favourable wholesale prices, Meteor would maintain that the imposition of a retail price cap has stymied retail competition. The Regulation has resulted in lower average retail voice roaming charges for consumers across Europe. However the initial implementation of Eurotariffs by the vast majority of operators have been at price points on, or just below, the retail cap level. It has been suggested by some that this is indicative of an absence of competitive pressure. Meteor does not agree. The fact is that the Regulation has been a significant intervention causing a shock to mobile market dynamics and caution should be exercised before jumping to any

10 conclusions on international roaming retail competition so soon after the implementation of the Regulation.

To ensure that the retail market can work to best deliver imaginative and really competitive retail pricing, i.e. for this market to actually work, Meteor would argue that the cap on retail prices should be removed.

Question 20 What evidence is there of competition between providers of intra-Community mobile voice roaming services in the provision of such services other than by means of the Eurotariff? To what extent do these alternative offerings satisfy the needs of roaming customers?

As Meteor only operates within Ireland, Meteor is not in a position to comment on pricing in other Member States of the European Union. Pan-European operators have the scope to internalise wholesale prices. This could give rise to competitive distortions in the retail market.

Question 21 In the event that the Regulation were left to expire on 30 June 2010 do you expect that providers of intra-Community mobile roaming services would maintain their Eurotariff or other retail offerings below the price ceilings applicable under the Regulation? What is the basis for your opinion in this regard?

In asking this question, the Commission is seeking to second guess what the market would do if prices were not capped and markets were left to function unfettered by tariff restrictions imposed centrally.

In answering this question Meteor would draw the Commission’s attention to the intense competition on domestic tariffs as evidenced in the Irish national mobile market. Using the example of domestic retail competition, Meteor would argue that it is the market that delivers and continues to deliver the best retail prices and tariff bundles for subscribers of mobile services.

However, it is Meteor’s assessment that by June 2010 retail rates imposed through tariff caps for voice roaming will be well established with consumers availing of roaming services.

Meteor would expect, therefore, tariffs to follow the trend in domestic pricing: i.e. continue to fall in light of increasing competition and development of sophisticated bundles and tariffs.

11 Wholesale Pricing Obligations

Question 22 Should wholesale regulation be maintained and, if so, for how long? If not, why not? What is your estimate of the share of total wholesale roaming capacity that is captive, i.e. produced on an intra-firm basis rather than purchased as an external input factor?

The high retail prices that persisted prior to the Regulation were a result of the wholesale pricing policies of the larger players which in turn limited the ability of pro-competitive operators such as Meteor to compete effectively in the provision of roaming services. In advance of the adoption of the International Roaming Regulation, Meteor argued strongly for the need for wholesale regulation/ intervention within this market.

It should be noted that the provision of international voice roaming capability to Meteor subscribers is a condition of the national GSM license issued to Meteor in 2001. Meteor is obliged, therefore, to offer as comprehensive a service as possible to Meteor subscribers, however, this service needs to be negotiated and purchased from third parties.

As a smaller operator providing services in only one country and lacking a pan- European footprint, Meteor will never enjoy the same buyer power as those operators with pan-European networks. As a consequence, Meteor’s ability to impact a wholesale price is severely restricted. Therefore, as previously outlined, Meteor believes that regulating the wholesale voice sector has provided a level playing field on which Meteor could offer and deliver competitively priced retail tariffs.

It should be noted, however, that since the introduction of the International Roaming Regulation Meteor has introduced a steering of roaming platform (June 2008). Meteor would expect that this will afford some degree of buyer power when it comes to negotiating and concluding agreement on inter-operator tariffs and help ensure that Meteor can continue to compete and gain access to competitive wholesale voice rates.

As the Regulation is only just impacting the functioning of both the wholesale and retail markets, Meteor would maintain that there exists sound economic and regulatory justification for the maintenance of wholesale voice regulation in the short to medium term, (at least until the expiry of the Regulation in 2010). Just as the regulation of national termination rates has ensured access to the market at a domestic level, Meteor would argue that at this stage in development of the international voice roaming market, regulating access at the wholesale level will ensure that smaller, competitor operators can continue to compete.

12 Question 23 What would be the effect if the retail pricing provisions of the Regulation were to expire, while the wholesale price obligations in Article 3 (adjusted as appropriate) were maintained? If so, for how long should the wholesale price obligations be maintained?

Whilst Meteor would insist on the need for the continuation of some degree of wholesale regulation of the voice market regulation in the short to medium term, Meteor would maintain that removing the retail restrictions would see the development of price movement and price competition.

As evidenced by the pricing strategies adopted by operators in the Irish market, retail price regulation has ensured pricing at the ceiling. Meteor would expect price movement and greater competition if ceiling price regulation is removed.

Question 24 In the event that you consider that the duration of the Regulation should be extended beyond 30 June 2010, do you think the Regulation’s price caps should be adjusted to reflect market and regulatory developments in the mobile sector? If not, why not?

Meteor would argue for the continuation of regulation at the wholesale level for the short to medium term (at least until the expiry of the Regulation). It should be noted, however, that any such regulation needs to be justified and proportionate and should reflect market developments.

At this stage of the Regulation it would not be appropriate for an operator to second guess pricing developments, therefore, Meteor cannot argue for the extension of the Regulation beyond the point already fixed.

Meteor would always look to the market to establish pricing both at wholesale and retail level. Whilst Meteor welcomed a degree of intervention to correct a “pricing anomaly” that existed within the wholesale voice roaming market that Meteor was not in a position to influence, the degree to which commercial negotiations are beginning to challenge pricing at the wholesale level will need to be taken into consideration before any further action in this market is taken.

Through the establishment of wholesale price caps, the introduction of a steering platform and a greater degree of willingness to negotiate bilateral deals, Meteor would expect that the market will deliver voice roaming charges below the regulated rates. The development of the market to this degree should hasten the day to a market working through competition alone.

Question 25 If yes, what would you consider to be the right level and periodicity of those price ceilings over the extended duration of the Regulation?

Meteor does not believe that it is appropriate to anticipate at this stage either the requirement for or level of wholesale price ceilings.

13 Transparency Provisions

Question 26 Taking into account the interests of mobile users and operators and the principle of proportionality, should the obligations regarding transparency contained in Article 6 of the Regulation be maintained in place (suitably adjusted), even if the price obligations themselves are allowed to expire? If so, what adjustments to those transparency obligations would need to be made?

The development and application of the pricing transparency provision of Article 6 of the Roaming Regulation proved extremely costly and time consuming for a small operator such as Meteor. Prior to the adoption of the Regulation, Meteor’s network was not provisioned to deliver this service. Ensuring compliance with all aspects of this article was, therefore, a challenge with reflecting expenditure and on-going cost.

As outlined in answers to previous questions, Meteor subscribers now receive an automatic SMS message providing pricing information when roaming on a foreign network within the EEA. The Regulation is currently due to expire in June 2010 at which time Meteor subscribers will have become used to receiving such information and it will have become part of the roaming experience.

As outlined above, the platform over which such messages are delivered was developed with considerable expense and effort on the part of Meteor. Although adopted as part of a regulatory obligation, due to the expense involved in adopting the platform and the integration of the service into the general customer experience, Meteor will continue to use this platform with or without a general obligation to do so.

Question 27 Do you consider that the transparency requirements of the Regulation should be improved and, if so, how?

Meteor would argue that the transparency provisions and resulting adoption by operators sufficiently meet customers’ expectations and requirements.

Data Roaming Services

Question 28 It appears that there are still very significant differences between data roaming prices and those applying at national level. Respondents are invited to explain (preferably using data on their latest standard and special domestic and roaming offers) how such significant differences can be justified.

Differences do exist between domestic and roaming data prices, however, this is predominantly due to the wholesale cost associated with data roaming. As a smaller operator with a presence in only one EU country and therefore lacking a pan- European footprint, Meteor does not enjoy the same buying power as those operators

14 with networks across Europe. The charges to which Meteor is exposed at the wholesale level therefore reflect Meteor’s position within the market.

Meteor continues to strive to introduce more competitive data tariff offerings to our customers as will be evidenced in the new data roaming retail prices to be announced by Meteor by 31 August 2008.

Question 29 To what extent is regulation of data roaming services necessary to tackle the problem of high charges? To what extent does competition exist for such retail and/or wholesale services and to what extent can traffic steering be utilised for data services to the benefit of consumers.

Meteor would argue that accessing data when roaming is a developing yet growing market. However, the market does not display the same maturity as the market for voice roaming did when it was considered and analysed in the run up to the adoption of the Roaming Regulation.

Whilst Meteor would maintain that, based on the same access criteria as applied to the wholesale international roaming voice market, there is a question as to whether wholesale regulation would be appropriate, regulators must be conscious of “regulatory creep” resulting in over regulation of a nascent sector.

Retail price reductions to be adopted by Meteor in July 2008 are evidence that Meteor does wish to ensure that data roaming is a service in which Meteor subscribers continue to enjoy at the most competitive rates possible taking into account constraints of our current wholesale cost base. As a smaller operator Meteor needs to achieve critical mass of such discounted wholesale agreements (i.e. at least one per Member State) in order to be able to develop improved pan-European retail offers. These negotiations take time. Falling wholesale prices are beginning to allow Meteor to address pricing at a retail level and, as the market develops and wholesale prices continue to fall, Meteor will be in a position to translate this into further competitive packages.

It should be understood by the Commission that growing access to data services, both nationally and when a subscriber is roaming, is part of the long term strategy of the mobile sector. Product development and pricing go hand in hand and Meteor’s medium to long-term development plans will see introduction to the market of more sophisticated data roaming price plans.

Question 30 To what extent do potential substitute services impose competitive constraints on data roaming services? To what extent might future market or technical developments tackle the problem? Are regulatory solutions other than price regulation possible? If so, please explain.

Potential substitutes such as WiFi hot-spots may be expected to impose competitive constraints on data roaming services for some customer segments. We are starting to

15 see some positive indications in our wholesale negotiations that market developments will render the need for additional regulation unnecessary.

Question 31 Can the problem of high charges for data roaming services be tackled by wholesale regulation alone? If wholesale regulation is to be considered, how should it be constructed? For example, should it be based on linear pricing (i.e. a fixed charge per MB or other charging interval) or should it be non-linear, i.e. with declining rates per MB or other charging interval? What charging intervals should it incorporate (e.g. PER 100 kb, per MB or other)

Meteor is conscious that the arguments that were put forward for the introduction of voice roaming wholesale regulation could be translated to the data market. However, it should be noted that Meteor argued for wholesale price intervention only within the voice market and at a time when Meteor was not in the best position to influence and affect the pricing levels.

Since the adoption of the International Roaming Regulation, Meteor has introduced a steering of roaming platform. Whilst such a platform can and does ensure that subscribers are directed onto the most preferential roaming platform, it also affords a mobile network operator greater authority when it comes to negotiating wholesale access agreements. The ability to steer customers to, and to steer customers away from, certain networks can and does influence pricing negotiations at the wholesale level, as evidenced in some recently agreed bilateral deals.

In addition to the above and since the introduction of the Roaming Regulation, Meteor has also seen an increasingly willingness by operators to negotiate more keenly priced roaming wholesale packages, packages that include data.

Given the degree to which the market in data roaming is only beginning to develop, the impact that commercial negotiations and technical solutions can have on pricing, Meteor would again caution on regulating this sector at either the wholesale or retail level.

In answer to the above question, therefore, Meteor would argue that whilst development may have been slow to date the market is beginning to act as the force that it should. Meteor wants to create a market where subscribers can access data roaming services at competitively priced levels and, as our network develops, Meteor subscribers will enjoy further competitive offerings.

Question 32 What additional costs, apart from the wholesale charges, are incurred by operators when providing data roaming services?

Apart from wholesale chares there are no significant additional costs i