mexico’s meandering telecommunications sector
DESCRIPTION
México: How to tap progress Ernesto M. Flores-Roux, PhD Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas , A.C. – CIDE Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Houston Branch Houston, Texas, November 2, 2012. Mexico’s Meandering Telecommunications Sector. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Mexico’s Meandering Telecommunications Sector
México: How to tap progress
Ernesto M. Flores-Roux, PhDCentro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas, A.C. – CIDE
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Houston BranchHouston, Texas, November 2, 2012
2
According to the OECD, Mexico has experienced a welfare loss equivalent to 2.8% of GDP per year in the last 5 years, 1.8 p.p. of which are due to excessive pricing
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
2.6 2.4 3.4
2.7 2.4 2.7 2.2
1.5 1.6 0.9
1.6 1.3
1.6
1.6 1.3
1.5
1.2
0.9 0.6
0.1
4.2
3.7
5.0
4.3
3.7
4.2
3.4
2.4 2.2
1.0
2000-2004: 4.2
2005-2009: 2.8
Welfare loss attributed to a dysfunctional telecom sectorPercentage of GDP
… due to unrealized subscriptions… due to excessive pricing
Loss in consumer surplus…
Source: OECD. (2012) OECD Review of Telecommunications Policy and Regulation in Mexico.
3
The amount of overpricing is higher than all but two taxes and is equivalent to the gasoline subsidy
Income tax (ISR)
Value added tax (IVA)Pemex
CFE
Special purpose tax (IEPS)
LicensingFlat rate business tax (IETU)
ISSSTE
Import taxCash deposits tax
IMSS
Social contributions
162.0Telecom overpricing according to the OECD
166.0 Gasoline subsidy
Series1 689.0
555.7
386.5
271.6
169.4
69.9
67.8
60.6
37.0
22.8
19.3
11.5
Public sector incomeBillions of pesos (nominal) – 2011
Source: SHCP (2012); OECD (2012)
4
If fixed telephony prices were similar to the OECD average, other basic staples’ prices could increase significantly with no impact on the inflation index
Series1
119%107%
63% 56% 51% 47% 41%
Eggs Pork Fruits Poultry Milk Tortillas Beef
INPC Fixed telephony weight: 1.51934Overpricing according to the OECD: 94.9%
Decrease potential: 0.77955
INPC weight 0.62302 0.69147 1.17588 1.31802 1.44288 1.58664 1.79145
Potential price increases with no effects on the INPC if fixed telephony were priced at OECD levelsPercentage over current price
Source: INEGI (2010, 2012); OECD (2012)
5
If these prices were the consequence of a vibrant telecommunications sector, there would be a trade-off to be considered. But that is not the case. In the most comprehensive measure of the ICT sector, published by the WEF, Mexico has lost between 12 and 32 positions in the last 10 years
Source: World Economic Forum
Series1
4149 48
4144
51
58 5856
44 44
60
5558 58
67
78 7876
Networked Readiness Index – NRIRanking of Mexico
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Original sample of countries (2002)
Overall ranking with an increasing sample size
6
TurkeyMexico
ChileHungaryBelgium
Slovak RepublicGreece
SloveniaEstoniaAustria
GermanyCanada
IsraelItaly
PolandSpain
Czech RepublicFranceIreland
United KingdomNew ZealandNetherlands
PortugalLuxembourgSwitzerland
IcelandAustralia
United StatesJapan
FinlandNorway
DenmarkSweden
Korea
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Penetration of basic services lags behind many countries
Source: OECD (2012)
- 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000
20 000
40 000
60 000
80 000
100 000
120 000
Mexico
Broadband penetrationFixed + Mobile, 2011
Average advertised speedin Mbps
GDP per cápita (PPP)
7
In mobile telephony in Latin America, Mexico lags behind every country except Cuba and Bolivia…
Source: World Economic Forum (2011); OECD (2011)
CubaBolivia
MexicoCosta Rica
Dominican R.Nicaragua
PeruHondurasColombia
GuatemalaParaguay
VenezuelaEcuadorPanama
BrazilArgentina
UruguayEl Salvador
Chile
14.1 78.4
84.3 85.8
89.1 92.8 94.7
99.1 99.2 99.5
102.7 105.8
110.0 127.3
131.3 139.3
142.3 143.6 145.4
Mobile penetrationMid 2012
8
… and it is a market which is extremely concentrated
Source: WirelessIntelligence (2012); company reports
IV-2
003
II-20
04
IV-2
004
II-20
05
IV-2
005
II-20
06
IV-2
006
II-20
07
IV-2
007
II-20
08
IV-2
008
II-20
09
IV-2
009
II-20
10
IV-2
010
II-20
11
IV-2
01168%
70%
72%
74%
76%
78%
80%
-2.5% in 4 years
70.3%
Telcel’s market sharePercentage
9
41 64 26 19
Penetration is very uneven among income groups…
Source: INEGI / ENIGH (2010) & ENDUTIH (2010)
XIX
VIIIVIIVIV IVIIIII
I
85 70
59 52
42 34
27 22
16 9
XIX
VIIIVIIVIV IVIIIII
I
92 86
80 77
72 66
57 49
37 22
XIX
VIIIVIIVIV IVIIIII
I
78 56
42 30
20 13
10 5 3 2
XIX
VIIIVIIVIV IVIIIII
I
67 43
29 22
12 9
6 3 2 1
Penetration of ICTs in Mexican householdsPer income level (deciles), 2010
Fixed Mobile Computers Internet
10
… and the gap is growing between the rich and the poor: the internal digital divide is growing very rapidly
Source: INEGI / ENIGH (2010) & ENDUTIH (2010)
Growth of ICTs in Mexican householdsPer income level (deciles), 2010
XIX
VIIIVIIVIV IVIIIII
I
5-2
-8-7
-10.6-11.5
-8-7
-6-5
XIX
VIIIVIIVIV IVIIIII
I
7.89.4
10.29.8
11.88.6
5.55.2
0.9-0.5
XIX
VIIIVIIVIV IVIIIII
I
3.63.9
5.63.6
1.40.4
1-0.4
0.81.3
XIX
VIIIVIIVIV IVIIIII
I
18.311.6
8.59.2
3.41.11.7
0.60.3
-0.2
-4.5-7.5
Top 50%Bottom 50%
9.83.9
3.60.6
10.20.7
Fixed Mobile Computers Internet
x 0.6 x 2.5 x 5.8 x 14.6
11
Schools are not well equipped…
Source: CIDE (2010)
DFNuevo LeónTamaulipas
Baja California SurCoahuliaTabascoSinaloa
ChihuahuaDurango
ColimaNayarit
JaliscoBaja California
TlaxcalaSonoraPuebla
MorelosQuintana Roo
CampecheOaxaca
YucatánMéxico
GuanajuatoQuerétaro
HidalgoSan Luis PotosíAguascalientes
MichoacánChiapas
VeracruzZacatecasGuerrero
7965
6160
5652
4946
4541
3836
35333333
322829
27262626
2525
1914
1312
98
5
Penetration of Internet access in schoolsPercentage, late 2010
Finland: 100%South Korea: 100%USA: >95%Chile: 75%
12
… and penetration in businesses is almost a mystery: no reliable statistics exist
Source: OECD (2011); For Mexico, from 20 to 49 employees
Series1
South Korea
Spain
Canada (2007)
Israel (2008)
Mexico (2008)
EU 27
Italy
Greece
10-49 employees50-249 employeesMore than 249 employees
Mexico (more than 10 employees):
51.6
Penetration of Internet in businessesPercentage, different years (as available)
13
The use of ICTs in government is also mediocre. In relative terms, it has gotten significantly worse in the last three years
Source: United Nations. e-Government Survey Report, 2008 & 2011
Series1 33
16
10
7
6
2
-9
-12
-15
-16 Mexico
Argentina
Brazil
China
Chile
Germany
United Kingdom
Colombia
Panama
Russia
51
52
55
72
36
16
3
40
62
25
Places gained (lost) in worldwide e-government rankings
2011 ranking
14
So what has gone wrong?
▪ Lack of government interest
▪ Not a national priority
▪ Inadequate laws and regulations
▪ Inadequate competition policy
▪ Abuse of injunctions
▪ Dominance of one player
▪ Regulatory capture
▪ No enforcement of laws and regulations
This can all be translated into one big issue:
Lack of institutions
15
So what can be done? First and foremost, institutions need to be fixed
Eliminate the “double window”
▪ Overlapping of functions does not provide checks and balances and creates enormous stress in the system
▪ The “double window” gives all players significant arbitrage opportunities
▪ It also reduces accountability in public officers▪ If not done correctly, the proposed creation of the
Secretaría de Comunicaciones will worsen the problem. This will determine, from the beginning, the possibility of changing the status quo
▪ Policy making and regulation need to be “MECEly” divided (Mutually Exclusive, Completely Exhaustive)
▪ Regulator must be able to fine players and set prices (either retail or wholesale) and the policymaker (SCT) ought to have no saying in the matter
16
Do “surgical work” to the different laws that rule the sector
▪ Fix the institutions – eliminate the “double window”
▪ Allow foreign direct investment with no restrictions
▪ Eliminate all bottlenecks and red tape contained in the law (enormous discretionary power to SCT and Cofetel)
▪ Allow Cofetel to determine “dominance”: currently, only Cofeco can do that, creating a “tercera ventanilla”
17
Change basic regulations
▪ Interconnection (prices should be set by the regulator, not negotiated between/among the players)
▪ Transport▪ Unbundling▪ Resale▪ MVNO▪ If all else fails, create alternative networks (“a la Telebras”)
▪ Develop (and enforce) asymmetric regulation for dominant players
▪ No discrimination /price differentiation▪ Interconnection rates
▪ Eliminate all bottlenecks and red tape created by regulation
Fix wholesale markets
Develop dominant player regulation
Eliminate red tape
18
Comply, enforce, and empower
▪ Guarantee that concession contracts are fully complied with:
▪ For example, Telmex continuously violates its concession contract, with no consequences whatsoever:
▪ Bundling of services ▪ Actions that can be considered dumping▪ Not allowing interconnection▪ Rural investment▪ …
▪ This is NOT restricted to Telmex, by any means: other players constantly abuse the system
▪ Information – availability + publicity▪ Citizen channels (“customer service”)
Enforce what is already available
Empower users
Mexico’s Meandering Telecommunications Sector
México: How to tap progress
Ernesto M. Flores-Roux, PhDCentro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas, A.C. – CIDE
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Houston BranchHouston, Texas, November 2, 2012
[email protected]@gmail.com