1 / 26

Digital Dividend With a special regard to the situation in Germany

Elmar Zilles Head Broadcasting , Federal Network Agency, G ermany. Digital Dividend With a special regard to the situation in Germany . Transition to Digital Broadcasting and Digital Dividend ITU Regional Seminar for Europe, Budapest, 05 – 07 November 2012.

noma
Download Presentation

Digital Dividend With a special regard to the situation in Germany

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Elmar Zilles Head Broadcasting, Federal Network Agency, Germany Digital DividendWith a special regard to the situation in Germany Transition to Digital Broadcastingand Digital Dividend ITU Regional Seminar for Europe, Budapest, 05 – 07 November 2012

  2. Digital Dividend – what’s that ? • Practical approach: • The Digital Dividend is understood as the additional spectrum, which will become available as a consequence of the digitalisationand proper establishment of existing analogue services, based on new, efficient transmission and coding technologies • Origin • The Digital Dividend results from a development on thetechnological, not on the political level! • A proper establishment takes into account all societal needs and is based on political decisions. 2

  3. “Facts” /History of Digital Dividend (1) • Different relevance of terrestrial provision of broadcasting in different countries • Mentionable differences in terms of the primary terrestrial service (i. e. the provision for the main TV set in a household) Consequence Differences in terms of quality and of quantity of the Digital Dividend have to be considered 3

  4. “Facts” /History of Digital Dividend (2) • Capacity claim is caused by number of programmes, NOT by percentage of provision! • “Regulatory” impact! 4

  5. “Facts” /History of Digital Dividend (3) • Market development in the German country case • In 2006 first time that more flat screen were sold than CRT-devices • By middle of 2012 more than 45 million high resolution TV sets in German households • (Near) future fixed reception situation: more than 90 % of TV sets capable of “Full HD” need 8 to 20 Mbit/s programmestreams • About 30 programmes needed to satisfy recipients to a 95 % extent,  via terrestrial reception very difficult even with DVB-T2 and H.264/AVC • Different conclusion for portable and/or mobile reception with smaller displays • Different feeds for different application situations? 5

  6. Transforming the Digital Dividend into consumers benefits (1) • More broadcasting • Added value within broadcasting ”better broadcasting” • Additional services other than broadcasting  “better life” 6

  7. Transforming the Digital Dividend into consumers benefits (2) • More broadcasting • 3 nationwide networks DVB-T (public broadcasters) • up to 4 additional networks region-wise/cities (private broadcasters) •  12 to 30 programmes instead of 3 to 7 • Added value within broadcasting • possibly introduction of DVB-T2 including plans for HDTV for some programmes 7

  8. Transforming the Digital Dividend into consumers benefits (3) • Provision was made in the economic stimulus package II • Federal government’s broadcasting strategy: 800 MHz band to be used promptly to provide sparsely populated areas with innovative mobile applications and broadband internet access [approx. 2.5 million households in Germany have no internet access with a minimum of 1 Mbit/s] • Original idea • No later than the end of 2010 efficient broadband connections should be available throughout Germany • No later than 2014 75% of the households, until 2018 for all households connections with at least 50 Mbit/s should be available • Answers to current available dynamic demands due to improved offers • High speed radiocommunication high power networks; in addition further construction/expansion of wired high power networks as well as in seemingly non lucrative areas • Goal achieved with “mixed resources” (broadband atlas , http://www.zukunft-breitband.de) 8

  9. Approach and activities in Germany • Objectives • Efficient usage • Guarantee for the development of broadcasting, though win-win-situation • Quickest possible expansion of the broadband supply in rural areas (IMT) No special path, but agreed approach in Europe under consideration of the different initial situations of the individual countries way 9

  10. Approach and activities in Germany (2) • Conclusion for the regulation • Technology neutrality • Flexibility • Regulation should and may business planning of the market participants not prejudice and narrow down • Planning certainty • Regulatory framework should not exclude, rather encourage incentives and secure investments • Consideration of the different long term initial scenarios in various European countries • In the short and medium time frame the different infrastructure conditions in the various countries have to be considered and developed in order to satisfy the existing and developing requirements of the users 10

  11. Approach and activities in Germany (3) • Overall concept for a more flexible use of spectrum • Liberalisation of existing licenses at 450 MHz (wideband trunked radio [PAMR], 900/1800 MHz (GSM), 2 GHz (IMT/UMTS) and 3.5 GHz (BWA) as quickly as possible • Award of 358.8 MHz spectrum (decision published 21/10/2009) • combining award at 1.8/2/2.6 GHz with award at 800 MHz • spectrum auction • technology and service neutrality for Electronic Communications Services (ECS; can be used for mobile, fixed or nomadic systems or applications) • spectrum cap in the band 800 MHz (2 x 20 MHz, paired) • Applications for qualification to take part in the auction were to be submitted until 21/01/2010 • Detailed information on all steps may be requested !! 11

  12. Approach and activities in Germany (4) • Additional Coverage Obligations • 4 priority classes • General requirement for each assignee to meet the obligation with 800 MHz spectrum • Other technologies are credited • Degree of coverage: 90 % of the population by 2016 • As of October 8th, 2012: • Obligation completely fulfilled in all but one federal state 90% P1 coverage 90% P2 90% P3 12

  13. Approach and activities in Germany (5) • Spectrum cap of 2 x 20 MHz (paired) for the 800 MHz band, account to be taken of the spectrum assigned in the 900 MHz band • Possibility for each bidder to acquire more than 2 x 5 MHz • This means for 800 MHz: • newcomers: max. 2 x 20 MHz • E-Plus / O2: max. 2 x 15 MHz • Vodafone / Telekom: max. 2 x 10 MHz 13

  14. The auction • Open ascending simultaneous multiround auction • Start date: 12 April 2010 • Duration: 224 auction rounds • End of auction: 20 May 2010 • Amount of minimum bids for total spectrum at the beginning: 90 million € Digital Dividend 1.8 GHz / 50 MHz MHz 14

  15. The auction (2) 15

  16. The auction (3) • Outcome in total 4.38 billion € 358.8 MHz 99.1 MHz 95 MHz 69.8 MHz 94.9 MHz 800 MHz 3,57 billion €(81.5% for 60 MHz) Other bands0.81 billion €(18.5% for 298.8 MHz) 1,299,893,000 € 1,378,605,000 € 1,422,503,000 € 283,645,000 € 16

  17. The auction (4) Spectrum price per hertz € / Hz 59,61 2,09 0,60 1,84 1,73 8,79 unpaired 17

  18. The auction (5) Spectrum held by the network operator after the auction 64,6 MHz (already assigned spectrum) 99,1 MHz (auctioned spectrum) 163,7 MHz 69,6 MHz 69,8 MHz 139,4 MHz 59,6 MHz 94,9 MHz 154,5 MHz 59,6 MHz 95,0 MHz 154,6 MHz MHz 18

  19. Fields tackled after the auction (1) • Mainly: • Allotment of the abstract frequency blocks won • Compatibility issues between German use and use in adjacent countries • Compatibility issues between mobile and PMSE • Compatibility issues between mobile and broadcasting services 19

  20. Fields tackled after the auction (2) • Allotment of the abstract frequency blocks won • The abstract frequency blocks won were to be allotted to their highest bidders at the end of the auction with a view to assigning contiguous spectrum • The successful bidders had the opportunity to agree amongst themselves, within a period of three month of the close of the auction, the spectral position of their blocks in the particular frequency band • If agreement between the successful bidders was not reached within this period, BNetzA would concentrate initially on the aspect of assigning contiguous spectrum and will allot the abstract blocks won in the bands at 800 MHz and 2.6 GHz • Done !!! 20

  21. Fields tackled after the auction (3) • Compatibility issues between German use and use in adjacent countries • On the long run, harmonised approach preferred • Short-term problems to be solved on a bilateral basis • Common tackling of common issues !! • Very good progress made (e. g. in WEDDIP and NEDDIF) • Agreements exist with nearly all neighbouring countries, allowing for the application of appropriate field strength values for bilateral co-ordination • Only few cases left for co-ordination mobile versus broadcasting or other service 21

  22. Fields tackled after the auction (4) • Compatibility issues between mobile and PMSE • In principle, no legal basis for protection of PMSE, but huge political interest • Frequency allocation issues solved by new concept for PMSE • Compensation for necessary replacements of equipment approved by German Federal Council • Rules set 22

  23. Fields tackled after the auction (5) • Compatibility issues between mobile and broadcasting services • Roll-out mobile service has to protect broadcasting • Three-level-approach 1. Definition of Block Edge Mask in advance (How to construct devices ?) 2. Definition of sets of technical characteristics of mobile service stations (after auction, but in advance of each single use of a station) 3. Corrective steps in case of unforeseen problems • Re-channeling of existing broadcasting usage on channels 64–66 (done!) • Refunding approved by German Federal Council • Ongoing for 2. and 3.!! 23

  24. Fields tackled after the auction (6) • Computer-aided definition of sets of technical characteristics • Individually done per base station • Transparent algorithm, open to MNOs • Based on data relevant for frequency planning, also open to MNOs • Effect: issuing sets of technical characteristics transparent and predictable • Corrective steps in case of unforeseen problems • Any appropriate measure welcome • MNOs take self-obligations for selection of measures INDIVIDUAL LY per base station • About 6000 base stations in operation in 800 MHz range • Interference disappeared in 5 cases after adjustments of receiving situation or application of filters • No more cases known! 24

  25. And the future? • Simply more spectrum for MNOs (“Digital Dividend II”) or a sustainable approach for the supply of capacity for mobile and broadcasting servicesin the UHF-Band? • All UHF band neither for MNOs nor for broadcasting sufficient • Implementation of 700 MHz even easier than 800 MHz? • Physical separation (“allocation”) versus logical separation (capacity per service in a common network structure) • Collaboration instead of conflicts • For all UHF?! • Party to be joined at the earliest point of time possible! WRC-15 not to be taken as singular point, nor as a final stage, but as the first step in a binding process This time, it is not a “dividend”! 25

  26. Digital Dividend in Germany Thank you very much for your attention! Elmar Zilles Elmar.Zilles@BNetzA.de www.bundesnetzagentur.de Transition to Digital Broadcastingand Digital Dividend ITU Regional Seminar for Europe, Budapest, 05 – 07 November 2012

More Related