The concern should have been more on the business viability. That is what makes a technology success or otherwise. While, the government is absolutely correct that the industry has to come up with innovative business models, even to the extent of creating disruptive ones, which may be extremely unconventional. But at the same time, government is conveniently forgetting that the policy imperatives have more than any bearing on a business model. So, unless the policy matters are not settled and made crystal-clear, there can be no \u2018magic\u2019 business model that any of the smartest companies could come with.<\/p>
Business model is essentially a blueprint of how services or products would be created and how the revenues would be generated. Now, all of this is impacted by the policy. In specific reference to 5G, all exhibited use-cases are visionary and who would not want to consume them. Once, price is attached to any use-case, its impact and usability is defined which has all the bearing on the feasibility of that use-case to a particular geography or economy. The demand generation is primarily driven by how policy has been set. In case of a technology like 5G, this will have a greater impact. There are so many high-impact social use-cases of 5G, especially in the domains of healthcare and education. A whole of macro-economic factors like employment, could be shaped by 5G.<\/p>
If the government applies the same rule of \u2018out-of-box business models\u2019 to policy, then we have to be ready for major deviations from how governments have dealt with the telecom sector in the country. In fact, with 5G it will not be just dealing with the telecom. Rather it would be dealing everything in the society and economy through telecom. This could also mean very strong interventions like converting spectrum fee from CAPEX to OPEX or completely doing away with it. Now, just imagine the impact this will have on all the use-cases. The potential opportunity will swell substantially. What may appear to be feasible for a million of users, will automatically become accessible to hundreds of million users. Similarly, several industrial domains, which understand that the real digital transformation, can only happen through a technology like 5G. For instance, in manufacturing, total digital transformation will demand a low or near zero latency network, which can only be offered by 5G.<\/p>
Similarly, education and healthcare potential use-cases could go to masses quickly, if the policy encourages business models which can create affordable services.<\/p>
The government has to show a \u2018rarest of the rare\u2019 approach in handling 5G. There is an old moral story of greed where a person kills a hen laying golden eggs to cash them all in one. This has been unfortunately the approach of government with the telecom industry. With 5G this has to change. There is a lot 5G can and will do to the economy. In simple terms, 5T ($5 trillion economy) will not happen without 5G.<\/p>
India is best suited for 5G. 5G cannot perhaps contribute to any economy to the extend it could to India. We have a proven data story. We are gearing for Industry 4.0 and we want to leverage technology to bridge the resource distribution across the country. All these are exactly addressed through 5G \u2013 eMBB (enhanced Mobile Broadband), mMTC (massive Machine Type Communications) and URLLC (Ultra Reliable Low Latency Communications).<\/p>
While the government is completely justified in pushing industry to take innovation to the next levels, there is a far more requirement of innovating the policy and regulatory regimes. That will have a cascading effect on business models and use-cases.<\/p>
Government has to take a cue from how globally major companies, which are no less than an economy has changed their revenue models. Microsoft is a great example. The company was traditionally selling software upfront which was a CAPEX for the users. This did make Microsoft grow, but equally there was a parallel market for its products and it was not scaling up beyond a point. Once, it took a bold step of disrupting its revenue stream which enabled software become an OPEX, variable expense for the customers, the base of the customers increased, so did the company. This was a very unconventional business decision taken by Microsoft at a time when even the ecosystem was not ready to support. Downloading a file was a nightmare in and around 2010 for most of the part of the world, not to imagine of an application. But it prepared itself for a disruption that demanded a new revenue model. Today, when we look at the success of Microsoft, nobody regrets the decision of \u2018cloudification\u2019 of the revenues for the company. It has earned it a laurel which cannot be easily achieved by many. The point is technology has to be for all and every stakeholder, especially government has to lead by example to make it affordable and penetrable to the last citizen in the line. 5G is going to be the bedrock of not only telecom but the entire technology spectrum and no service \u2013 for or not for profit can be imagined in future without 5G. So, making it available at a steep cost will kill innovation and restrict growth of the economy. 5G is a launchpad that can take any business to the galaxies but stepping on that launchpad has not to be steep.<\/p>
One might counter argue that businesses and governments work differently. Yes, indeed! But both have a common goal of maximising the wealth of respective constituencies. For a company it\u2019s the shareholders and for the government it is the citizens. Government has to look at such examples and think of maximising the wealth of the citizens and not maximising the revenue of the government. That is also the fundamental principle of modern economics and financial management.<\/p>","blog_img":"","featured":0,"status":"Y","seo_title":"ETT 5G Congress: If 5G demands new business models, so does it demand new policy regime","seo_url":"if-5g-demands-new-business-models-so-does-it-demand-new-policy-regime-et-telecom-5gcongress-takeaway","cms_link":"if-5g-demands-new-business-models-so-does-it-demand-new-policy-regime-et-telecom-5gcongress-takeaway\/3701","updated_at":"2019-09-09 17:03:49","time":"2019-08-02 09:30:18","authors":[{"author_name":"Faisal Kawoosa","author_description":"Founder, Principal Analyst, techARC","author_designation":"Founder, Principal Analyst","author_company":"techARC","profile_pic":"retail_files\/author_1509706883_temp.jpg"}],"tags":["5GBlog"],"url_seo":"if-5g-demands-new-business-models-so-does-it-demand-new-policy-regime-et-telecom-5gcongress-takeaway"}">
电报
脸谱网
复制链接
之间的主要差距之一目前工业和政府5 g将触发。虽然政府认为,行业必须改变其业务模式为5克,这个行业感觉不同即用政策观点是必需的。感觉是自己在听到各种政府利益相关者是他们希望5 g在技术方面来证明自己。例如,它是安全的吗?然而,事实是,许多这些担忧已经定居在一个或另一个世界的一部分;,其余的全球协作。这意味着,与其他任何技术一样,脱颖而出,到目前为止,5 g的技术会越来越成熟每天传递。
应该更关注的商业可行性。这也是技术成功与否。,政府是绝对正确的,这个行业已经想出创新的商业模式,甚至产生破坏性的程度,这可能是极其非常规。但与此同时,政府很方便地忘记了政策规则比任何轴承的商业模式。因此,除非政策问题不解决,清澈的,不可能有“魔力”的商业模式,任何最聪明的公司可能有。
商业模式本质上是一个蓝图的服务或产品将如何创建和收入是如何生成的。现在,所有这些都是受政策影响。具体参考5 g,表现出用例都是有远见的,谁不希望使用他们。一次,价格是附加到任何用例,其影响和可用性定义用例的所有轴承的可行性特定地理或经济。一代的需求主要是由政策是如何设置。5克之类的技术,这将有更大的影响。有很多高影响力的社会用例5 g,尤其是在医疗和教育领域。整个宏观经济因素,如就业,可以由5克。
如果政府适用相同的规则“即用商业模式”的政策,那么我们必须准备主要偏离政府如何处理电信部门。事实上,随着5 g不只是处理电信。相反,它会通过电信解决一切社会和经济。这也意味着很强的干预措施像转换光谱从支出成本转化为运营费用或完全摆脱它。现在,想象一下这将影响所有的用例。潜在的机会将大大增加。什么似乎是可行的一百万的用户,将自动成为几亿用户访问。同样,一些工业领域,了解真正的数字转换,只能通过技术发生5 g。例如,在制造、数字变换将总需求低或接近零延迟的网络,它只能提供5克。
同样,教育和医疗潜在的用例可以去大众很快,如果政策鼓励商业模式可以创建可负担得起的服务。
政府必须显示的稀有罕见的方法在处理5克。有一个古老的道德故事的贪婪,一个人杀了一只母鸡下金蛋现金他们所有人。这是不幸的是政府和电信行业的方法。5 g的情况必须改变。有很多5克,能经济。简而言之,5 t(5万亿美元经济)不会发生没有5克。
印度是最适合5克。5克也许不能造成任何经济扩展到印度。我们有一个证明数据的故事。4.0工业传动装置,我们想利用技术桥梁资源分布在全国各地。所有这些正是通过5 g - eMBB(增强型移动宽带),mMTC(巨大的机器类型通信)和URLLC(超可靠的低延迟通信)。
虽然政府是完全合理的,推动行业创新到下一个水平,有一个更创新政策和监管制度的要求。将有一个级联影响业务模型和用例。
政府已经从全球大公司,如何不少于一个经济改变了他们的收入模式。微软是一个很好的例子。公司是传统销售软件的前期资本支出的用户。这让微软成长,但是同样有一个平行市场对其产品和不扩大超出一个点。一次,花了一个大胆的一步,扰乱其收入流使软件成为运营成本,变动费用的客户,客户的基础增加,该公司也是如此。这是一个非常传统的商业决策由微软的时候甚至生态系统是不准备支持。下载一个文件是一个噩梦,大约2010的世界的一部分,而不是应用程序的设想。但它本身的破坏要求准备一个新的盈利模式。今天,当我们看微软的成功,没有人后悔的决定“云化”为公司的收入。它赢得了月桂导致很多人无法轻易通过。 The point is technology has to be for all and every stakeholder, especially government has to lead by example to make it affordable and penetrable to the last citizen in the line. 5G is going to be the bedrock of not only telecom but the entire technology spectrum and no service – for or not for profit can be imagined in future without 5G. So, making it available at a steep cost will kill innovation and restrict growth of the economy. 5G is a launchpad that can take any business to the galaxies but stepping on that launchpad has not to be steep.
有人可能会反驳说,企业和政府的工作是不同的。是的,的确!但都有一个共同的目标的财富最大化各自的选区。对一个公司的股东和政府是公民。政府必须看看这些例子,认为公民的财富最大化,而不是政府的收入最大化。这也是现代经济学和财务管理的基本原则。
