However, with the changing technologies, everybody\u2019s approach has to change. The way 2G, 3G and 4G were dealt, perhaps need a departure in policy and regulatory outlook when talking about 5G. There is a fundamental difference which calls for this new innovative outlook from all including the government.<\/p>

5G is a denser technology which needs huge spectrum for any operator to do justice with. This translates to mammoth investment in spectrum alone, if we go by the present spectrum prices proposed. This makes 5G a non-starter in any market. At present no telecom operator would be in a comfortable position to consider committing huge sums for spectrum alone. There is an equally important and similar range of investment required for network infrastructure for 5G to happen. There is also a need to have denser fibre rollout, setting up of large number of base stations, investment in services, applications and ultra-rich content. All of these ingredients will go into the making of a meaningful 5G.<\/p>

With the present approach, even if somehow operators are able to pay for the spectrum, it will not necessarily mean consumers getting benefits of the 5G. It will result in a kind of \u2018spectrum hoarding\u2019, where out of no wrong intention, operators will just be holding the spectrum and will be left with no resources to deploy the technology on top of it. Under the present guidelines, there appear to be only two outcomes of 5G in India; a) operators shall never be able to launch 5G at an appropriate time, or b) operators shall at best \u2018hoard\u2019 the spectrum. Now in both cases, the government can also not realise any revenues in terms of taxes and other critical macro-economic benefits like job creation, infrastructure development, etc. Rather than this, if the government disruptively decides not to sell spectrum but look at other means of revenue generation once 5G is live, it could actually translate in more revenues for the state. This is just like a dividend policy; whether the organisation should announce dividend and give immediate returns to the shareholders or plough it back for maximising wealth of an investor. For government, like any rationale organisation, the objective should be of maximising wealth. In case of government and citizen relationship, there are other considerations as well including better living conditions which could be an outcome of latching on to the latest technology. We have observed in the past that technology upgrades the living standards.<\/p>

Even if we assume that the government does not change the stance and goes by the convention of charging spectrum fees upfront, the operators who could then sail through and actually reach a stage where they could offer a commercial 5G service, shall have to charge at a much higher scale than what we see our current ARPUs settled around. This means, only affluent section of the society can pay for such premium or ultra-premium services. While the operators might still be able to make money and secure a decent return on their investments, there will be a new form of digital imbalance created in the society. There will be digital elites and digital marginals. This goes completely against the fundamental proposition of digital which promises bridging and narrowing any sort of divide in the society \u2013 information, resources, opportunities and participative.<\/p>

There is a whole lot of ecosystem which can get created once 5G services are enabled. The economy will get a kick-up as new avenues and opportunities shall be created by the resource pool built over 5G technology. This shall have its own multiplier influence on the economy ultimately maximising the wealth of nation as well as citizens, which is supreme to tactical tax and revenue collection low level objectives of any government. 5G may not result in revenue creation of the state but it will spur a whole lot of activities which will indeed result in wealth creation and it is upto the government to decide how facilitative it could be to make this happen.<\/p>","blog_img":"","posted_date":"2019-11-04 16:39:16","modified_date":"2019-11-04 16:39:16","featured":"0","status":"Y","seo_title":"Government's disruptive thinking to decide whether 5G is for masses or a luxury","seo_url":"government-s-disruptive-thinking-to-decide-whether-5g-is-for-masses-or-a-luxury","url":"\/\/www.iser-br.com\/tele-talk\/government-s-disruptive-thinking-to-decide-whether-5g-is-for-masses-or-a-luxury\/3856","url_seo":"government-s-disruptive-thinking-to-decide-whether-5g-is-for-masses-or-a-luxury"},img_object:["","retail_files/author_1509706883_temp.jpg"],fromNewsletter:"",newsletterDate:"",ajaxParams:{action:"get_more_blogs"},pageTrackingKey:"Blog",author_list:"Faisal Kawoosa",complete_cat_name:"Blogs"});" data-jsinvoker_init="_override_history_url = "//www.iser-br.com/tele-talk/government-s-disruptive-thinking-to-decide-whether-5g-is-for-masses-or-a-luxury/3856";">