Defining what a telco is

Ike Señeres .

BY definition, a “cellular” call is a voice call that goes through a cellular network, whereas an “internet” call is a voice call that goes through the internet. The “cellular” call uses the Global Systems for Mobile (GSM) technology, whereas the “internet” call uses the Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology. Moreover, the “cellular” call uses the “voice” load, whereas the “internet” call uses the “data” load. For the most part, most people do not know the difference between the two, and would not even care to know. That is like people not knowing the difference between a gasoline engine and a diesel engine all they know and all they care about is that the car, whatever it is, gets them from one place to the other.

In the old days, a “telco” was either a telephone company or a telecommunications company, as the case may be. The first interpretation seems to have lost its meaning, in the sense that people seldom use the “telephone” unit anymore, usually called a “landline”. As it is now, people are making “voice” calls using either GSM technology or VoIP technology, as the case may be. It appears that as of now, a “telco” would best be defined as a telecommunications company, offering not just “voice” calls, but also text and data services, the latter including internet services and network services of course. Also in the old days, it was generally understood that a “telco” not only needs a frequency to be able to qualify as a “telco”, it also needs a franchise. Although it is still debatable, I am willing to say that as of now, that is no longer the case.

At the risk of stating the obvious, I would say that a franchise is only needed when a frequency is used. You might notice that I did not use the term “wireless frequency”, because that would obviously be redundant. In other words, what I am saying is that no franchise is needed when a frequency is not used, for example whenever wires or cables are used. Again, you might notice that I did not use the term “fixed wire”, because again, that would be obviously redundant. In that connection, I have heard some people using the term “fixed wireless”, and I am totally confused when I hear that, because it seems to be totally oxymoronic. As I understand it however, it is possible to for a company to be called a “telco” for as long as it is offering one form of telecommunications services or the other, even if it does not have a frequency or a franchise, even if it is only using wires or cables.

For all intents and purposes, it could be said that no company could claim to offer mobile services not unless it has a wireless infrastructure. Add to that the reality that mobile services actually include internet access via Wi-Fi or via mobile data. Even with that reality however, it is already true that many locations are now offering Wi-Fi for free or for pay, meaning to say that consumers could now use their mobile phones to access the internet without using their own load credits. In theory therefore, a company could claim to be a “telco” for as long as it could offer telecommunications services even if it uses only wires and cables, and even if it does not offer mobile services.

In reality, it could be said that Touch Mobile is a private label that is powered by Globe Telecom, in the same manner that Talk n Text is a private label that is powered by Smart Communications. In theory, it could be said that the major telcos could actually power a third party player, and that is what happened when ABS-CBN Mobile came out as a private label powered by Globe Telecom. Hoping against hope, it seems possible that one of the major telcos would allow another private label, of course if and only if the proponent would have a humongous volume to make them deserve it. Well, as the theory goes, the owners of Value Added Networks (VANs) are not even supposed to provide Value Added Services (VAS).

As it is already happening, it seems that the Internet Service Provider (ISP) business that was “killed” by the major telcos some years ago is now coming back. As it is now, third party companies could now provide ISP services to internet cafes and co-working spaces. I really hope that this trend would continue, because that would mean smaller companies earning from the infrastructure put up by the major telcos. Going direct to the point, it would be good to see the day when the major telcos would exist not only to make money for themselves, but also to empower the Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) to make money for themselves too.

E-mail: iseneres@yahoo.com