$\"\"$ Former telecom regulator Rahul Khullar<\/a> has waded into the raging controversy over new rules on predatory pricing<\/a>, saying they are one-sided and not fair.

The watchdog should have also stayed away from the sector’s competitive aspects, which are mostly in the domain of the Competition Commission of India<\/a>, said Khullar, who was chairman of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India from 2012 to 2015.

He criticised his successor for not taking a view on zero and near-zero tariffs since late 2016, when Reliance Jio<\/a> Infocomm started services with free voice and data offerings for months, which led to a shrinking of industry revenue and thereby, a reduction in the government’s income.

“The tariff order is not at all fair. It is one-sided,” Khullar told ET.

Trai mandated a new formula last month to identify predatory pricing and changed the definition of significant market player (SMP), giving pricing flexibility only to operators with less than 30% of the market’s subscribers or revenue. India’s top three operators – Bharti Airtel, Vodafone India and Idea Cellular – contended the rules favoured Jio at their expense, allegations that Trai and Jio termed baseless.

“The way the rules have been laid down, they seem to say that Reliance Jio is not a significant market player, so it cannot be guilty of predatory pricing, but others are significant market players and therefore can be held guilty of predatory pricing. This is absurd,” Khullar said.

Vodafone Group CEO Vittorio Colao<\/a> and Bharti Airtel Chairman Sunil Mittal<\/a> have said they would move court against the predatory pricing order, while Trai has said the carriers are free to do so. Both telcos have suffered heavily since Jio entered the market in September 2016.

Khullar also said Trai should have stayed away from the issue of predatory pricing and let the anti-trust body decide the definition of SMP.

“Sectoral regulators, whether they are in telecom, electricity or others, are entitled to lay down rules and regulations which will influence competition,” he said. “Once the industry is functioning, whether one firm is behaving competitively vis-à-vis others or not, that is the matter for the CCI to decide. Trai should have let the CCI deal with SMP or even what is fair and unfair.”

Trai did not comment on queries seeking a response to Khullar’s statements as of Thursday<\/span><\/span> evening.

The telecom regulator and CCI are currently battling out the matter of jurisdiction on predatory pricing in the Supreme Court.

In its tariff order, Trai junked norms such as volume of traffic and switching capacity that were used to define SMP. It said predatory pricing will be determined on a carrier’s average variable cost and that telcos cannot offer pricing packages to individual subscribers to retain them without offering all customers the same tariff plan.

Analysts said the rules put the older operators at a disadvantage because they can’t compete without falling foul of the new definitions. Jio has a 13-14% share of revenue and users and is several quarters away from attaining the SMP threshold, while Airtel and the proposed Vodafone-Idea Cellular combine would each have over 30% revenue market share.

Khullar flagged what he called the “partial” behaviour of the regulator over the past several quarters and said Trai “maintained a studious silence on predatory pricing” even after the telecom tribunal and the government told it last summer that industry revenue was declining and that a view should be taken on zero and near-zero tariffs.

“But Trai continued to do nothing. Now, nobody in their right minds would allow such tariffs to continue indefinitely, certainly not an independent regulator. Trai did nothing for nine months and now comes a predatory pricing order that is not balanced,” he said.

Bharti Airtel, Vodafone India and Idea Cellular had red-flagged Jio’s initial free offers, saying they were predatory. However, Trai in January 2017 and the telecom tribunal recently approved Jio’s tariff plans.

\n<\/body>","next_sibling":[{"msid":63133743,"title":"Aircel creditors to knock on NCLT door to recover dues","entity_type":"ARTICLE","link":"\/news\/aircel-creditors-to-knock-on-nclt-door-to-recover-dues\/63133743","category_name":null,"category_name_seo":"telecomnews"}],"related_content":[],"msid":63133759,"entity_type":"ARTICLE","title":"Trai ex-chief slams new rules on predatory pricing, terms them one-sided","synopsis":"Vodafone CEO Colao and Airtel Chairman Mittal have said they would move court against the predatory pricing order, while Trai has said the carriers are free to do so","titleseo":"telecomnews\/trai-ex-chief-slams-new-rules-on-predatory-pricing-terms-them-one-sided","status":"ACTIVE","authors":[{"author_name":"Gulveen Aulakh","author_link":"\/author\/19656\/gulveen-aulakh","author_image":"https:\/\/etimg.etb2bimg.com\/authorthumb\/19656.cms?width=250&height=250&imgsize=27429","author_additional":{"thumbsize":true,"msid":19656,"author_name":"Gulveen Aulakh","author_seo_name":"gulveen-aulakh","designation":"Assistant Editor","agency":false}}],"Alttitle":{"minfo":""},"artag":"ET Bureau","artdate":"2018-03-02 08:52:42","lastupd":"2018-03-02 10:11:36","breadcrumbTags":["Rahul Khullar","Predatory pricing","Vittorio Colao","Competition Commission of India","Reliance Jio","Sunil Mittal","policy"],"secinfo":{"seolocation":"telecomnews\/trai-ex-chief-slams-new-rules-on-predatory-pricing-terms-them-one-sided"}}" data-authors="[" gulveen aulakh"]" data-category-name="" data-category_id="" data-date="2018-03-02" data-index="article_1">

曾任英国火车猛烈抨击掠夺性定价新规,他们片面的

沃达丰首席执行官科劳和Airtel主席米塔尔已经表示他们将法院对掠夺性定价秩序,虽然火车说,航空公司都是免费的

Gulveen Aulakh,
等局

更新2018年3月2日上午11点坚持

前电信监管机构拉胡尔Khullar新规则也积极投入到激烈的争论掠夺性定价,说他们是片面的和不公平的。

广电总局还应该远离这个行业的竞争方面,主要的领域印度竞争委员会Khullar表示,电信监管机构主席印度从2012年到2015年。

他批评他的继任者没有采取对零和接近于零关税自2016年底以来,当依赖JioInfocomm开始与免费的语音和数据服务产品数月,导致行业收入的减少,从而,减少政府的收入。

“关税秩序是不公平的。这是片面的,”Khullar告诉等。

上个月火车要求一个新的公式识别掠夺性定价和改变重要的市场参与者(SMP)的定义,给运营商定价灵活性只拥有不到30%的市场用户或收入。印度三大运营商Bharti Airtel,沃达丰印度和想法细胞——竞争规则青睐Jio费用,火车和Jio称为毫无根据的指控。

“规则已经制定,他们似乎认为依赖Jio不是一个重要的市场参与者,因此它不能被掠夺性定价的指控,但其他人是重要的市场参与者,因此可以举行掠夺性定价。这是荒谬的,”Khullar说。

沃达丰集团首席执行官维托里奥·科劳和Bharti Airtel主席苏尼尔•米塔尔法院说,他们将对掠夺性定价秩序,虽然火车说,航空公司都是免费的。电信公司都遭受了严重2016年9月进入中国内地市场以来,Jio。

Khullar还说火车应该远离掠夺性定价的问题,让反垄断机构决定SMP的定义。

“行业监管机构,无论他们是在电信、电力或其他有权制定规章制度会影响竞争,”他说。“一旦行业运作,一个公司是否行为竞争力相对于其他人,CCI来决定的事情。火车应该让CCI处理SMP甚至什么是公平和不公平的。”

火车没有评论查询寻求应对Khullar的语句周四晚上。

目前电信监管机构和CCI与管辖权的问题在最高法院的掠夺性定价。

关税的秩序,火车报废的标准体积流量和转换能力等被用来定义SMP。据说掠夺性定价将确定承运人的平均可变成本,电信公司不能提供定价包个人用户留住他们没有提供所有客户相同的关税计划。

分析师表示,规则把老运营商处于劣势,因为他们不能没有损害竞争的新定义。Jio有13 - 14%的市场份额的收入和用户和几个季度远离获得SMP阈值,而Airtel和拟议中的Vodafone-Idea细胞结合每个会收入30%以上的市场份额。

Khullar标记他所谓的“部分”行为监管机构在过去几个季度,说火车“掠夺性定价保持好学的沉默”即使在去年夏天电信法庭和政府对这个行业收入下降,应采取一个视图在零和接近于零关税。

“但是火车继续无所事事。现在,任何思维正常的人会允许这样的关税会无限期地持续下去,肯定不是一个独立的监管机构。火车没有了九个月,现在是掠夺性定价的顺序是不平衡的,”他说。

Bharti Airtel,沃达丰印度和想法细胞Jio最初的免费提供预警,称他们是掠夺性的。然而,火车在2017年1月和电信法庭最近Jio关税计划的批准。