April 25, 2024

Raw Data: Supply and Artificially High Demand in European Mobile Spectrum

A recent spate of auctions — in the Netherlands in December, in Britain in February and in the Czech Republic this month — has reinforced the perception that Europe does not have enough available frequency to satisfy the demand for talking, texting and surfing the Net on mobile phones.

The Dutch auction raised €3.8 billion, or $4.9 billion, much more than some had forecast, while the Czech auction March 11 was halted by the national regulator because of its concern that the high bids would make faster, Long Term Evolution broadband too expensive for consumers. The auction was stopped after the initial bidding climbed to more than 20 billion korunas, or $1 billion — almost three times the amount of revenue the government had expected.

But two other influences on the bidding had nothing to do with demand for spectrum.

Regulators in each country set aside part of the spectrum they were selling for a new operator, or to favor a smaller bidder, which required big operators to compete more aggressively.

In the Netherlands, the Dutch regulator reserved a third of the prime 800-megahertz spectrum for a new entrant, which turned out to be Tele2 of Sweden. In Britain, the regulator, Ofcom, structured its sale so that 3, the smallest British operator, would receive a disproportionate share of spectrum, in effect creating a fourth, nationwide operator.

Another big influence on the overheated bidding was the structure of the auctions. In the British, Dutch and Czech auctions, as well as in previous auctions in Switzerland and Denmark, regulators used a “combinatorial clock auction,” a complex bidding format devised by game theorists that generally leads to higher payouts.

Under this method, known as C.C.A., operators must submit hundreds, often thousands, of parallel bids for various combinations of the frequencies being sold. Ultimately, the price a winning operator pays is determined not by the price it offered but by the price its competitors bid for the same wavelengths.

Scott McKenzie, a director at Coleago Consulting, a firm in London that advises operators on spectrum auctions, said the use of the C.C.A. auction format and the efforts to introduce new competitors in each market were two reasons for the higher payouts.

By contrast, a 2010 auction in Germany, the biggest national telecommunications market in Europe, raised just €4.4 billion. That was because the German regulator, the Bundesnetzagentur, chose a more traditional format, the simultaneous multiround ascending auction, in which bidding proceeds in linear fashion until the highest offer wins.

Mr. McKenzie said there was probably no shortage of spectrum in Europe, despite some industry and government assertions otherwise. “I’ve been in this business 25 years and they’ve always been saying that we’re going to run out of spectrum,” he said. “But it has never happened.”

One reason is that network equipment operators like Ericsson, Huawei and Nokia Siemens Networks continue to get more capacity out of 3G networks, or develop new ones based on LTE. Seven years ago, before the advent of modern smartphones, the International Telecommunication Union, a United Nations agency in Geneva that coordinates global radio frequencies, predicted a coming spectrum crisis.

“But if the I.T.U. forecast had held true, all mobile networks with significant mobile broadband usage would have crashed by now,” said Stéphane Téral, an analyst at Infonetics Research, in California. Gains in network efficiency, and the use of private and public Wi-Fi to carry wireless data, are reasons the big crash has not materialized, Mr. Téral said.

Starting in 2017, the universe of available frequencies will expand again in Europe, when some countries begin to sell portions of their 700-megahertz spectrum to mobile operators for the first time. The frequency band is currently being used by digital terrestrial television broadcasters.

Finland is planning the Continent’s first auction.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/technology/supply-and-artificially-high-demand-in-european-mobile-spectrum.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Off the Charts: U.S. Recovery Fares Well in a 5-Year Comparison

But it wasn’t. The fourth quarter of 2007 was the peak for the American economy. It began a mild recession in early 2008 that turned into a severe one by late in the year, when the credit crisis spread to most of the world. A few countries escaped recession, but virtually no one was able to avoid severe bear markets in stocks.

The accompanying charts look at changes in gross domestic product and stock markets around the world since the end of 2007.

In some countries, including the largest developing economies in Asia, the G.D.P. charts show no indication that bad things ever happened. China’s G.D.P. growth slowed a bit, and may be slowing more now, but it never came close to recession.

By the third quarter of 2012 China’s gross domestic product, measured in local currency and adjusted for inflation, was 50 percent larger than it had been at the end of 2007. The economies of India and Indonesia had each grown by 30 percent.

At the other end of the spectrum, some major economies are smaller now than they were then, with little indication that they will completely recover any time soon. The Italian and Spanish economies, hurt by their inability to compete with Germany in export markets, continue to decline. Spain’s economy is smaller than it was in 2005, while Italy’s has fallen below 2003 levels.

Both would be doing better if they were able to devalue their currencies against Germany’s, but they cannot because they share the euro.

Not being in the euro has been critical to the success of some European countries. Poland’s economy has grown by about 15 percent, measured in local currency, as the value of the zloty fell sharply in late 2008 and has yet to fully recover against the euro. That has made its exports more competitive.

While some developing economies have showed good growth over the last five years, their stock markets have not done well. In early 2008, China’s market broke sharply lower, leading to fears that a world recession might begin there. Nothing like that happened, but the stock market has yet to fully recover.

The United States has perhaps the best combined record of major developed economies. Its G.D.P. is 2.5 percent larger than it was at the end of 2007 — a smaller gain than was shown in Australia, Canada or Germany — but its stock market is closer to recovering all the lost ground than the markets in any of those countries.

MSCI, a research company that compiles stock indexes based on all major stocks in each country, reports that its All Country World Index is now 16 percent lower than it was five years ago. World G.D.P. — counting all 56 countries for which data through the third quarter of 2012 is available — has fully recovered, largely because of strength in large emerging economies. Both those figures are calculated in dollars, but individual country charts are based on performance measured in local currencies.

Floyd Norris comments on finance and the economy at nytimes.com/economix.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/29/business/us-recovery-fares-well-in-a-5-year-comparison.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Economix Blog: Do Parents Put Too Much Pressure on Students?

DESCRIPTION

Even Tiger Moms seem to think they’re pressuring their kids too much.

That is one possible reading of a new Pew Research Center global survey of parents’ attitudes to the pressured placed on students.

The survey, conducted March 18 to May 15 by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, found that China was the only one of 21 countries or territories where a majority believes parents put too much pressure on students to do well in school. In China, 68 percent of adults think parents pressure students too much, and just 11 percent think they don’t push them hard enough.

On the other side of the spectrum is the United States, where more than 6 in 10 Americans say parents do not put enough pressure on their children.

It’s hard to know what to make of these attitudes. The countries where people are most likely to say students are pressured too much do have reputations for being pressure-cookers for students (China, Pakistan, India). And the United States has repeatedly disappointed on international testing.

Does that mean surveyed attitudes are correct? If they are, why aren’t they affecting behavior?

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=b804f1348c58f5dda97a5348cdc0acde