Malawi: under-penetrated mobile market offers opportunities for local entrepreneurs?

Talking about Zain seems to be the flavour of the month here at DTW. Following yesterday's piece about the future of the group's African assets, today I'd like to zero in on one of the these, the company's MNO in Malawi, which, according to a recent Cellular News story has clashed with the country's telecoms regulator over plans to lower tariffs.

The Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority apparently wants to open the market up to more networks in order to get a better deal for consumers. Zain, meanwhile partly blames high taxes for the current prices which customers must pay. The cellco also claims that as the overall mobile market grows in Malawi, it will be able to lower prices. Zain Malawi's Managing Director Fayaz King explains: "Imagine at Zain, we have mounted a network that could take up to 5 million users but we currently have only 1.5 million customers. We believe that if at least 3 million people started using the Zain network, we could start enjoying the benefits of economies of scale."

What does the country's mobile market look like, in terms of penetration and in terms of the competitive landscape? According to WCIS, mobile penetration in Malawi stood at just 13.36% (vs. an African average of 39.20%) as of March this year. This market (from an overall population size around 13.9 million) is currently home to a duopoly, with Zain enjoying the lion's share (70.98%) and the remaining subscriptions being owned by Telekom Networks Malawi, a cellco in which the country's incumbent fixed line operator Malawi Telecommunications owns a 44% stake.

While there are certainly numerous European countries with populations smaller than that of Malawi sustaining three or more mobile operators, the landlocked southeast African country might nevertheless offer insufficiently attractive returns for prospective new entrants seeking to split the market more than two ways. While its high population density suggests that mobile coverage could be built out relatively cost-effectively, Malawi is, however, among the world's least developed countries, with a heavily agriculture-dependent economy and with GDP per capita of less than USD 320. Low life expectancy, high infant mortality and a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS all blight the country, with the latter draining the labour force and expected to impact further on GDP in the near future.

I have reported here more than once a feeling among powerful multinational telecoms groups that Africa will see a wave of market consolidations as smaller players struggle to compete againts better-funded rivals. This feeling has been articulated by MTN CEO Phuthuma Nhleko and by Zain Africa CEO Chris Gabriel in remarks quoted here yesterday. Due to the economic factors mentioned above, Malawi might be the kind of market where only MNOs able to leverage the scale and best practices of large groups can prevail and prosper in the long term.

In line with the regulator's desire for more competition, however, two more mobile networks have indeed been licensed. Or is it just one? I will admit to being a bit confused on that point. This week's Cellular News piece on Zain's clash with the regulatory agency states that "two more networks have been licensed. Globally Advanced Integrated Networks (Gain) expects to launch its network within the next couple of months, while G-Mobile is still waiting to announce a launch date."

An article written in April this year by Gregory Gondwe of BizCommunity, however, refers to Globally Advanced Integrated Networks as being the holder of the G-Mobile brand name. Gain and G-Mobile? One and the same? Or two separate entities? I am genuinely unsure. Answers, please, from anyone who really understand the Malawi mobile scene...

Whatever the story, the G-Mobile name was mentioned in an April 3rd story from the Informa Telecoms & Media Global Mobile Daily service - this stated that a company named Lilongwe Mobile planed to operate under the G-Mobile brand name. The GMD report quotes the company's Vice Chairman Limbani Kalilani, who says that the new cellco is expected to invest USD 40 million in the first five years of operations. If I've got this right, Mr. Kalilani will be a colourful addition to the ranks of Malawi's mobile sector leaders. As far as I can tell, the G-Mobile Vice Chairman has also established himself as a rap music star (AKA Tay Grin) as well as setting up a wireless payphone company called Phone Yanu.

Can the rapper/enterpreneur and his partners succeed in this mobile enterprise? Let's see. It's worth pointing out that forty million dollars is an extremely modest investment for a mobile network. To put that sum of money into context, consider that Zain Malawi invested ninety million US dollars in 2008-09 just to expand and improve its existing network coverage across the country.

It's churlish not to wish any local entrepreneurs well in their attempts to offer services to their Malawian compatriots. I would personally be surprised, however, if the challenges they face do not turn out to be very considerable.

One cause of optimism, however, for enterprising Malawians looking to get into the telecoms space, could come in the form of the Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority going out of its way to smooth their way into the market. The main thrust of Gregory Gondwe's article is that Gain/G-Mobile (?) is initially expected to pay a smaller levy of audited net operating revenue than the two established MNOs, something about which Zain is reported to have sought "clarification."

Malawi: under-penetrated mobile market offers opportunities for local entrepreneurs?

Out of Africa: Zain to sell assets to a European buyer?

Earlier this week I started to receive email news updates suggesting that Zain, the Kuwait-headquartered multinational telecoms group specialising in mobile communications across the Middle East and Africa may be quitting the latter territory.

If this is correct, Zain's stay in Africa will turn out to have been quite a short one, having extended its reach from its Middle East roots via the 2005 acquisition of Celtel International, the pan-African telecoms group founded by the Sudanese-born British entrepreneur Dr. Mo Ibrahim.

One report from TelecomPaper contends that Zain Group may agree as early as this week to sell its African unite to a French company for up to USD 12 billion. A French company? A good guess has to be France Telecom/Orange, right? That was my first guess, but one report from a Nigerian newspaper is tipping Vivendi, the telecoms and media group whose assets include majority stakes in French quad-player SFR and Morocco's Maroc Telecom. It must be said that I haven't found any other articles naming Vivendi as an interested party...

The Nigerian report continues that if the deal isn't settled, Zain will study bids made by other companies. Apparently, the plan is for the French company to buy Zain Africa's debts, which will be discounted from the purchase price.

If there is any truth in this story, genuinely savvy market-watchers are now invited to smile at my naivety now because I must admit that since well before the inception of this blog, I have regularly opined that in the current economic climate, the only telecoms strategic investors likely to remain acquisitive, expanding their geographical reach in any major way, would be those headquartered in the Middle East and Gulf region. I was, of course, thinking of Zain as well as the likes of Etisalat and QTel. If these reports are to be believed, however, we will see a major Gulf region player divesting significant assets with a European buyer being the acquirer. Not at all what I would have expected.

If the timing of this were different, perhaps the pool of prospective purchasers would be larger. For example, one player which would presumably find it very challenging to become involved right now in a tussle for Zain's African assets is the South Africa-headquartered MTN group. If Zain really does intend to quit Africa, the timing is odd, argues Lesley Stones of MoneyBiz. Stones feels that MTN is an "obvious suitor" and therefore wonders why Zain would put its African business up for sale just as the South African group is negotiating a tie-up with Bharti Airtel of India, especially because these two "have agreed to talk exclusively to each other until July 31." MTN, as Stones, notes, was one of the interested parties when Zain/MTC prevailed with its acquisition of Celtel International.

Given my own contention that groups such as Zain are more likely to be in buying mode than selling mode these days, the big question for me around all of this is why Zain would be looking to sell its African unit. Let's look at evidence to support the notion that this would be a strange move:

• Celtel operators across Africa were the subject of an expensive rebranding exercise only last year - surely quite wasteful if there was never a long-term plan to stay in these markets.
• As Lesley Stones notes, as recently as November, Zain Africa CEO Chris Gabriel said the company "planned to be the acquisitor rather than the acquisition in an inevitable consolidation of telecoms players."
• As Stones argues, Zain CEO Saad Al Barrak has not hinted at any plans to sell, instead saying only a month ago that the group has an "unwavering commitment to reach our 2011 target of being a top-10 global mobile operator", an aim that would be made impossible by the shedding of a major chunk of its business.
• Zain’s commitment to Africa saw it launch a network in Ghana as recently as December.
• Zain has announced plans to introduce mobile financial services for Africa's unbanked via cellphones in several countries this year.

Bearing all of this in mind, the whole thing does feel rather implausible. The (non?) story seems to originate from a single article in a Kuwaiti newspaper. As Lesley Stones notes, rumours of the sale may simply be untrue. Watch this space, I guess.

Out of Africa: Zain to sell assets to a European buyer?

Ad-driven MVNO concept ailing in Europe but set to succeed in India?

In March, I chewed over the question of whether India or one or more markets in Africa would be the most likely setting for genuinely successful MVNOs to gain traction. I came down on the side of India, notwithstanding the fact that earlier the same month I had commented briefly on regulatory wrangles which looked set to frustrate certain business models for prospective MVNOs in the country.

One possible new entrant in India, according to a Cellular News story today, could be Blyk. For anyone not familiar with this company, Blyk, positioned by its developers as a "totally new proposition", has been making headlines (in Europe at least) and, as I have observed, stimulating debate at telecoms industry conferences since its inception in 2007.

The Blyk business model has been built on a belief that young people (the offering has been targeted exclusively at 16-24 year olds) love to communicate, would like to do so without eating into their disposable income and can thus be persuaded to accept a certain amount of advertising being sent to their mobile devices in exchange for a free service.

The Finnish founders of Blyk, Pekka Ala-Pietilä and Antti Öhrling, contend that their offering to advertisers is also very compelling: "Blyk allows advertisers to reach young people using the only channel that they carry with them everywhere," says the blurb on Blyk's corporate website. Advertisers, runs the blurb, "can engage them in a dialogue, one that they are uniquely ready for, because they’ve opted in." The ad-driven MVNO says its advertising products are "based on the most dominant pattern of mobile behaviour among young consumers: getting a message and responding to it" so that "its offerings create awareness, build relationships and drive sales.

Will this resonate in India? Possibly, but there might be a number of questions asked. The Cellular News story quotes Sanjay Behl, head of branding and marketing operations at cellco Reliance Communications, who has expressed concerns about whether consumers would find the adverts too intrusive, while declining to confirm or deny if the company is in talks with the MVNO.

This kind of response is not new for Blyk. When the UK press covered the launch of the new service back in 2007, the main talking point seemed to be to what degree consumers might find mobile advertising irritating. The Guardian newspaper, for example, warned that advertisers would "have to be careful not to annoy their new users with the mobile equivalent of spam email."

Pekka Ala-Pietilä, once President of Nokia, responded to this challenge in the same article: "We will collect the profiles of the young consumers, or members as we call them, who use the service to find out their areas of interest," he said, adding that "by understanding the preferences of our customers, advertisers will be able to create very relevant campaigns."

It now seems that this model is indeed set to be brought to the Indian market. According to a recent MocoNews article, senior level recruitment is already underway and Blyk spokesperson Ann Sarimo has confirmed that the MVNO does indeed plan on doing business in the country.

How successful, then, has Blyk been in Europe? Well, while the company can claim to have had some impact in the UK markets, recent reports have focused on a scaling down of its ambitions to offer similar services on the same basis elsewhere.

Caroline Gabriel, for example, writing for Rethink Wireless, suggests that the Blyk variation on more standard MVNO business models "is now showing signs of strain", with the company "reported to be scaling back its efforts."

Gabriel talks in terms of Blyk's UK operation "only" having acquired about 200,000 subscribers, which, in her view, "suggests the model may be proving too limited to support Blyk's ambitions and those of its backers, especially at a time of advertising downturn." In Gabriel's article, Pekka Ala-Pietilä is said to have admitted that the economic crisis has forced the company to cut costs and streamline its operation, despite having raised an additional USD 51 million to support a planned expansion into the European mainland. Gabriel reports that even when these funds were raised, Blyk was indicating that it favoured a switch away from running full-blown MVNOs of its own, in favour of a new marketing strategy based on partnering with major MNOs and media companies. Gabriel suggests that the most likely route forward now is for Blyk to work with larger cellcos, perhaps to run an ad-supported strand of their business under the MNOs' brands rather than Blyk's own.

Around the same time, Mobile Today echoed Caroline Gabriel's thoughts, contending that Blyk "has declared it will freeze its expansion plans into Europe." This article, too, insists that "modest consumer take-up" and "investor reluctance" are the factors which have "grounded" the project. Blyk co-founder Antti Öhrling, now the CEO of the UK operation, is quoted as saying that the UK would be used as a 'proof of concept', i.e. a case study for selling the mobile advertising concept to other markets.

I had to smile when this article brought up comments made by John Strand of Strand Consult. Strand admits in his own bio that "being honest - and giving his honest opinion on current issues in the mobile industry has become [his] trademark - even when it means being controversial or treading on some toes." I have seen this at first hand at one or two conferences and remember sharing a joke with a colleague who is still in the telecoms conference production business, as I was for a good few years. We agreed that nothing was surer to rattle an august line-up of big name speakers from major telecoms businesses than a few particularly piercing questions from Mr. Strand. We couldn't decide if this was a good or bad thing for a conference organiser - good in terms of livening things up a bit, or bad in terms of scaring top-name speakers away from future iterations of an event.

The Mobile Today article reminded me of the comments Strand made when Blyk was first launched. Adopting his trademark style, Strand remarked then that he "would rather put his money on a lottery ticket." Last month, commenting on the reported scaling back of Blyk's ambitions, he said "it is a difficult proposition because you need a hell of a lot of advertising revenue to mae it work." Tell it like it is, John.

In the context of what can hardly be construed as good news about Blyk in its native Europe, it will be interesting to see how the mooted move into India plays out. Perhaps the sheer scale of the market there will enable the business model to prevail more successfully. That said, I have noted here before that while India's low overall mobile penetration and vast population appear to offer rich opportunities, the market is already so competitive that players such as BSNL and Bharti Airtel are increasingly looking to foreign adventures for further growth prospects, the latter having gained much recent coverage concerning a hoped-for link up with giant pan-African cellco MTN. So let's see if this competitive market does indeed offer a decent opportunity for Blyk and for any other innovative MVNO propositions.

Ad-driven MVNO concept ailing in Europe but set to succeed in India?

Football fever goes mobile

I am a football addict (translation for US readers: soccer; I don't have anything against the gridiron game, but I don't understand why it's called "football" when only the kicker and punter use their feet). My own team drifted out of contention for any honours this year a long time ago, but I retained an interest at the business end of the 2008-09 season by watching the European Cup final and the FA Cup final in quick succession. The last throes of football fever before a long, dry summer of cricket and other minor irritations.

Football fever in Turkey, however, never seems to die down. I think of myself as a fanatic, but my dedication to my team pales, I think, into insignificance when compared to the mania for the game demonstrated by followers of Istanbul's big three clubs - Beşiktaş, Galatasaray and Fenerbahçe. Thanks to a friendly reader of this blog, I am now aware that the latter two of these footballing powerhouses have entered the mobile services space, thanks to arrangements with Avea, the cellco associated with national incumbent fixed-line operator Türk Telekom.

On visits to Turkey, I'd heard that the time is not yet right for full-blown MVNOs to make their market debut in the country - something to do with how the services would be taxed. So, as confirmed by the friendly Istanbul-based reader of this blog, the two football clubs' offering is based on a reseller business model for now.

Galatsaray's fans, doubtless disappointed with their team finishing 5th in the Turkcell Süper Lig (sponsored by the county's market-leading MNO), might be consoled just a little by the prospect of cheap calls via GSMobile. That said, I'd guess today's appointment of fomer Ajax and AC Milan genius Frank Rijkaard as team manager is probably a bigger deal.

Fenerbahçe followers, meanwhile, probably much not less annoyed at only finishing 4th in the table, can take advantage of the service of Fenercell.

Beşiktaş fans, as far as I understand, do not have a club-branded mobile offering to enjoy. The fact that they won the league title and saw their deadly rivals under-performing probably more than mitigates the disappointment, though.

Each of these clubs has a huge fan base. Access to subscriber data about a very loyal customer base could be a massive advantage to a prospective MVNO. So it will be interesting to see how these enterprises fare.

Football fever goes mobile

Mobile consumer power goes militant - but might a third entrant be what is needed to boost mobile take up in Syria?

Mobile operators in Syria can't have been pleased with the recent efforts of activist bloggers in the southwest Asian Arab Republic. The bloggers were urging subscribers to make this month start badly for the country's two cellcos (MTN Syria and SyriaTel) by boycotting services for the duration of June 1st.

A GlobalVoices report on this protest notes that "in an extremely connected world, Syria is still lagging behind". By way of an explanation of this claim, the report states that Internet pentration stands at about 17% with "the vast majority of users... still endur[ing] the screeches of a dial-up modem due to the country's weak broadband infrastructure."

On the wireless side, mobile penetration in the country stands at just 37.86% according to WCIS. In the Middle East region, only Yemen and the Palestinian Territories are less mature mobile markets in terms of penetration. The GlobalVoices article contends that ever since the introduction of mobile services, "the media echoed the customers' discontent with service rates" with "the state of the struggling Syrian telecoms sector.. largely attributed to the US embargo on the country and corruption within the Syrian telecom bodies." The article states that the disgruntled Syrian bloggers have had enough of the current prices and services.

An article from ITP, dated June 2nd (i.e. the day after the protest), provides more details, noting that the protest gained traction after a frustrated mobile user encouraged others to stop using their phones for one day. The protest was apparently adopted by more people, with the message spreading via blogs and social networking sites such as Facebook.

I imagine it will be impossible to find any data on how much of a dent in the two cellcos' profits this will have made, and the ITP article contends that any such dent is unlikely to have been very significant. However, ITP's Roger Field, the author of the piece, wonders whether the incident will encourage the Syrian Government to take a fresh look at its telecommunications policy, which, in Field's words, "is widely viewed as thwarting competition and restricting services."

Field also took the time to speak with Josep Maria Moya of Delta Partners, a management advisory and investment firm specialising in telecoms, media and technology, which operates from offices in the UAE, Bahrain and South Africa. Moya says that mobile users in Syria "were probably frustrated not just with the relatively high cost of calls and per minute billing, but also the restrictive validity of top-up cards." Until recently, reports Roger Field, customers buying the most popular card, worth SYP150 (USD 3.25), had only seven days to use the credit before facing disconnection.

Field contends that this system, which forces mobile users "to spend a minimum of SYP600 per month", makes services too expensive for many Syrians.

Another factor suggested by Josep Maria Moya to account for the country's very low mobile penetration is MTN and Syriatel being compelled to operate under BOT (build operate and transfer) contracts, "with little incentive for the two companies to invest in their networks or build their customer bases when they could be forced to hand over all of their operations, including assets, to the Government once their licences run out."

In Roger Field's article, an unnamed Syrian expat working in the UAE contends that the two operators' disinclination to invest and innovate is such that their services are "exactly the same" and that their charges are also very similar. This Mr X also alleges that there exists "a high level of coordination" between the two cellcos "so they can decide the fee they would like to charge."

Roger Field asserts that as well as having one of the lowest moble penetration rates, "Syria has among the highest mobile tariffs in the region." The suggestion here is of a rather cosy duopoly which is not working to deliver value and meaningful choice for consumers - and this begs the question about whether a third entrant might be able to do well by differentiating its offering on price and range of services, and by taking full advantage of the room for growth created by the low level of market penetration. Who, then, might be looking to muscle in on the action? In the context of the US embargo, any strategic investor would need to hail from a part of the world where the nervousness of American shareholders would not be an issue. Perhaps that part of the world would be Russia. In March, the Middle East and Africa Wireless Analyst service offered by Informa Telecoms & Media suggested that Russian interest in a third license might be quite strong, citing remarks made in November 2008 by Russia's Communications Minister Igor Shchyogolev, who said Syria was considering inviting bids from Russian operators for a mobile concession which could be offered in 2009. The MEAWA piece, authored by a former Informa colleague with whom I had the pleasure of working from time to time, Nasreddine Mana, contends that the two Russian operators that are most eager are Vimpelcom and MTS.

Much as it is appeals to my possibly somewhat British tendency to root for the little guy/underdog, my guess is that the entry of a powerful new player such as a major Russian cellco would be more likely to deliver hard-pressed Syrian consumers with lower prices and better services than the efforts of the bloggers agitating for change this week.

Mobile consumer power goes militant - but might a third entrant be what is needed to boost mobile take up in Syria?

Where will MNP go live in 2009? How should MNOs respond?

With Mobile Number Portability now about to hit the Indian market, the country's technology media are following the debate about how much impact this is likely to have.

Jatinder Singh, writing for Voice & Data magazine, notes that MNP has been a long time coming:

"After years of discussions and apprehensions by major telecom operators, MNP or mobile number portability, is finally going to make inroads into the Indian telecom market. [The] TRAI has approved the pan-India implementation of MNP, and [the] DoT has framed the timeline of its implementation; it is expected to hit the market by year-end."

Singh notes that MNP will be phased in piecemeal, region by region, starting with Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkatta and Chennai, with nearly 18% of the total cellular subscriber base given the option to change service providers while retaining their current mobile numbers. Singh also expresses the opinion that MNP may force operators to improve quality of service in order to avoid losing customers to rival MNOs.

So, how seriously are India's operators taking MNP in terms of threats and opportunities it might create? A range of views are reported in Jatinder Singh's article:

Kuldeep Goyal, Chairman and MD of BSNL, which currently occupies 4th place in terms of mobile market share with 11.95% of subs according to WCIS, seems upbeat about MNP, saying "It would certainly offer opportunities in the Indian telecom market. We are positive with our market share and would be eyeing more customers once things are in place."

From market-leading Bharti Airtel, Dr Jai Menon (Director, Customer Service and IT) notes that MNP has had varying levels of impact in markets worldwide. "We are ready and believe that it allows more and more customers to come to our network and enjoy the services," says Dr Menon. Also speaking for Bharti Airtel, Deputy CEO Sanjay Kapoor told the Business Standard earlier this month, that MNP "is more relevant in countries where you have long-term contracts", going on to explain that because "India is a prepaid market... number portability won’t be a game-changing opportunity for anybody." For Kapoor, the vast, price-sensitive prepaid segment is already so inclined to regular churn with "the exit and entry cost on prepaid connections... so low", that he does not believe MNP "really adds to value."

It is, perhaps, tempting to assume that a newer market entrant would be welcoming MNP much more enthusiastically, mindful of an improved opportunity to grab customers from established rivals.

Raymond Yu of telecoms think tank Ovum, writing earlier this month, however, contends that all MNOs are vulnerable to MNP-driven churn. He cites the cases of Greece and Lithuania, where the largest operators actually managed to increase their market shares immediately following the introduction of MNP. Yu also recalls the case of Hong Kong, where although all MNOs experience a large number of ports, "this is not unique to the customers of the market leaders."

In India, considerations of this kind may account for the apparently quite muted repsonse of new kid on the block Sistema Shyam Teleservices. The Voice & Data article quotes Vseovolod Rozanov, the company's CEO, as saying "it is more of an opportunity than a threat. However, looking at the experiences of global markets, the influence on change in the market share is not very dramatic." This is not to suggest, however, that Rozanov is completely disinterested in MNP. In a recent Economic Times article he is quoted as saying "number portability will... drive growth for us." The Sistema-backed operation, which has now harmonised its brand with that of the giant Russian cellco which is part of the same group, has, according to WCIS, yet to break the 1% mark in terms of market share.

The Bharti Airtel CEO's comments about market conditions in India somewhat diminishing the relevance of MNP are echoed, to a degree, by remarks made by the head of the telecoms regulatory agency in Uganda. In this case, however, market size rather than the behaviour of prepaid users is being put forward as the argument against imminent deployment of MNP.

A recent Cellular News story quotes Patrick Masambu, Executive Director of the Uganda Communications Commission, as saying that "at this stage, number portability is not something we see as a remedy in this market." Mr Masambu feels that the Ugandan market needs to grow further before the costs could be justified. He added, however though that once the country has passed the 10 million subscriber mark, then MNP could be viable. I find it a little curious that Mr Masambu chooses 10 million subs as the trigger for more actively considering MNP. If you read his comments without knowing the size of the Ugandan mobile market, you might imagine that the country has rather fewer than the 10 million subscriptions. According to WCIS, however, the country had 9.95 subs as of March this year. Hmmm...

In neighbouring Kenya, the deployment of MNP may also be some way off, if a recent article from the country's Standard newspaper is to be believed. The Standard's Robert Ndingwa notes that the Communications Commission of Kenya (CCK) has just three months to go before its September 2009 deadline to implement its version of number portability but states that the regulator is yet make a decision on whether to licence local number portability operators, "leaving consumers at the mercy of dominant mobile service providers." Ndingwa alleges that the CCK "prefers, instead, to hide behind its so-called principle of technology neutrality in the new market structure it introduced."

With some operators and regulators apparently lukewarm about the need for and effects of MNP, it might be worth asking whether views of this kind might mask a degree of fear about number portability. If so, Ovum's Raymond Yu dvises operators in particular not to be too worried, suggesting that each MNO must decide whether to view MNP as a threat or an opportunity and then devise an effective strategy in response.

Yu argues that "essentially, there are two ways to react to the introduction of MNP: either promote it or keep it under covers." In most cases, challenging operators would take the aggressive stance, says Yu, "whereas dominant operators are initially more reluctant to push MNP."

Yu notes that popular strategies for promoting MNP include making it a normal part of the sales process and using marketing to increase consumer awareness and perception of the facility to retain their numbers when switching providers. Strategies to defend against MNP include, according to Yu, simply not advertising it, implementing strong win-back strategies in line with porting requests and employing stronger loyalty and retention initiatives.

Let's see which of these options are chosen by MNOs in India - and in Uganda and Kenya, should MNP become a reality any time soon. According to Raymond Yu, other markets to watch for MNP deployments this year include Ecudaor, the Dominican Republic, Peru and Thailand.

Where will MNP go live in 2009? How should MNOs respond?

TeliaSonera poised to take over Latvian operations - but only once we've ridden out the downturn

My focus here tends to be on the telecoms sector in states to which we can, without too much controversy, attribute the sometimes contentious labels 'emerging markets' or 'developing countries'.

Not a great deal of time is spent here, therefore, discussing events in Europe - even the less-highly developed countries thereof. That said, I retain a strong personal interest in the Central and Eastern parts of the continent, not least because I lived and worked in Poland in the early-mid 1990s, a time of fast-paced socioeconomic change, the effects of which I felt at first hand. For me at least, a decade after I was travelling around the CEE region from my Polish base, the gaps between Western and Eastern Europe seem smaller all the time. I've often wondered for how much longer it will be meaningful to think in terms of there being a distinct CEE region.

One CEE state which I've not yet visited is Latvia, which is a glaring omission given that I have a distant family connection to the country. I daresay I will remedy this before too long. Until then, I follow telecoms sector developments there via the usefully informative blog maintained by Juris Kaža, am a Latvian-American journalist living in Latvia.

Today, Juris posted a very recent video interview with Kenneth Karlberg, President of Mobility Services for giant Scandinavian telco TeliaSonera, which owns a 49% stake in Latvia's incumbent fixed-line operator Lattelecom, which in turn owns 23% of LMT, the country's second-ranked mobile operator in terms of share of subscriptions. LMT's other shareholders are state-owned TV and radio broadcaster VAS Latvijas Valsts Radio un Televīzijas Centrs, a Latvian state privatisation fund and TeliaSonera. Again, I think I understand from the interview with Mr Karlberg that the Scandinavian telco would like to acquire any shares it does not already hold in the company:



When, then, might TeliaSonera be able to consolidate its position in Latvia? According to a recent article in Baltic Course magazine, any sale of Government telecoms assets will have to wait "until after the economic crisis is over." This view comes straight from Economy Minister Artis Kampars, who is also quoted as saying that "running a company, whose main goal is to generate as large a profit as possible for its owners, is not a government function". This does not mean, however, retreating from that function with undue haste, according to Mr Kampars who feels the sale of Lattelecom shares "must be organized so that it brings as much money as possible for the state." For Kampars, to do this will involve waiting for the Latvian (and global) economy to begin to recover from the current malaise. "In the meantime," says Kampars, "we have to streamline the company's management and expand the company's business also outside Latvia in order to increase the value of the company."

This streamlining, if carried out, seems set to hit the pockets of some senior people on the Latvian telecoms scene. The Baltic Course article states that in Kampars' opinion the current Lattelecom council, which has eleven members, needs to be downsized by reducing the number of council members elected by the state of Lavia as well as by TeliaSonera. Mr. Kampars also believes that the salary for Lattelecom board chairperson should not exceed the salaries paid to board chairpersons at other government-run companies. From that, I infer that there does exist some considerable gap.

TeliaSonera poised to take over Latvian operations - but only once we've ridden out the downturn