Should operators try to own the edge?

At the Edge Computing Congress 2019 in London, the keynotes and panel discussions focused on the unique opportunity for operators to own the edge if they want to.

Edge computing refers to distributed datacenters that place reduce the physical distance between the cloud and the edge of the network – i.e. the RAN. The main point of this is to reduce the lag from interacting with the cloud in real time and to allow the kind of low-latency communication services that promise to be the most novel new feature of 5G. Edge computing is also expected to help with things like bandwidth flexibility for IoT, cloud security and data localisation.

The presentations were opened by Julian Bright of analyst firm Ovum, who warned that 5G probably needs the edge more than the edge needs 5G and set the tone for the rest of the morning by asking who will own it. Bright also raised the issue of interoperability and noted that the definition of a common framework for edge computing is some way from being determined.

As is often the way, most of the talking points came from a panel (pictured) that aimed to explore definitions of edge computing, what the point of it is, and the business cases for investing in it. It was agreed that the edge is not a discrete, standalone thing, but rather an extension of the cloud. That said, by definition it requires its own separate physical infrastructure, which has to be built and owned by someone.

This is presents a unique opportunity for operators, for whom distributed infrastructure is a core competence. They also own, or at least have access to, a lot of remote locations, so they have a head start over cloud specialists and IT companies. Edge computing was said to be the perfect example of the convergence of networks and IT, which raises the question of which of those worlds will define and own it.

A key issue for edge computing concerns interoperability. As an extension of the public cloud it needs to be usable by all stakeholders. One way to ensure this is standardisation, something the telecoms world is very familiar with. Standardisation typically takes a long time, however, and the panel warned that operators are likely to lose their advantages in this space if they allow themselves to be bogged down by it.

There are also cultural dynamics involved. The IT world typically moves faster and is less risk-averse than the networking world. While telcos are used to significant infrastructure capex, this is typically in areas where there is proven demand and ROI. Heavy investment in edge computing will require more of a ‘build it and they will come’ strategic philosophy.

This observation led to a discussion of the chicken-and-egg dilemma that comes with the prospect of investing in a new technological platform without a mature business case to go with it. As we saw with historical attempts to break the duopoly in smartphone operating systems, it’s hard to get customers for your platform without a strong app ecosystem, but developers are reluctant to embrace any platform that doesn’t have a large and enduring user base.

There was unanimity among the panel that ownership of the edge is there for operators to take if they want it, but they need to move fast. If they do they will need to accept risk in the form of capex without the guaranteed ROI they’re used to and they will also need to seed the app ecosystem in ways they have historically avoided. For operators the edge is about new revenue opportunities rather than efficiencies and their approach to it needs to reflect that.

After the panel there was a keynote from Mahadev Satyanarayanan, Professor of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University, who further explored the value propositions of edge computing. He stressed that the deeper the use of the edge, the more of a premium can be charged for the resulting service. A real-world example of such a service can be seen in the video below of a project Satyanarayanan oversaw, using vehicle cameras to enable crowdsourced traffic information without the driver needing to be actively involved.

FCC moves to kill off all exposure to Huawei in rural networks

FCC Commissioner Geoffrey Starks has stuck the knife into Huawei at an industry conference, suggesting rural telcos will be given financial assistance to cleanse their networks of the vendor.

Speaking at the Competitive Carriers Association annual conference, Starks targeted the Chinese telecommunications industry on the whole, and Huawei in particular. Not only is the FCC exploring ideas on how to ban the purchase of Huawei equipment entirely, but also the introduction of an initiative which would offer federal dollars to search for, and remove, legacy Huawei equipment which might be in the network.

“Huawei is one of the biggest telecom equipment manufacturers in the world, and although its share of the U.S. telecom market is relatively small, some wireless carriers have purchased Huawei equipment for their networks,” Starks said.

“These carriers bought this equipment, often a decade or more ago, because it was far less expensive than other options, and because Huawei was willing to work with them to create customized networks.

“The Commission is currently examining whether to ban the use of federal support dollars for the purchase of such equipment, but we can’t ignore the problem of the equipment that’s already here.”

Starks is the FCC frontman for a new programme which has been known as ‘Find it, Fix it, Fund it’. The initiative will provide funding to telcos to self-assess networks and identify what would be deemed as ‘suspect equipment’. Currently it is voluntarily, though it does appear there are regulatory changes on the horizon to make the initiative a compliance issue.

In the short-term, the equipment might be allowed to stay in the network, though it would be quarantined. Long-term, Starks is suggesting every piece of equipment would have to be ripped and replaced.

The financial support from the FCC is an interesting element, and it does seem to have been working with the private sector to advance its ambitions.

“Nokia and Ericsson have said that they are willing to create products and financing options geared toward smaller carriers that need to replace Chinese equipment,” Starks said. “They also claim that they have had handled similar replacement efforts with minimal customer disruption.”

The challenge which many of these rural telcos are facing. Financially these companies are under strain. Connectivity is an expensive business and the rural players cannot experience the same economy of scale benefits the national players can. Ripping and replacing prior investments would be a kick in the teeth for already financially tense environments.

This is the reason Huawei has been successful in engaging rural and regional connectivity providers in the US. Not only does it offer a broader range of products, some of which are much more financially attractive, but it has been much more open to customisable deployments than rivals. The US is an incredibly varied geography, there is not a one-size-fits-all opportunity here.

A lack of competition and the removal of the cheapest network infrastructure provider is a massive concern for the rural and regional telcos. However, with the help of federal funding and new business offerings from Ericsson and Nokia, the financial burden of rip and replace regulations might be lessened. This does not mean networks will be better or cheaper in the long-term, but it is a nod from the FCC to the immediate concerns.

Aside from this conference speech from Starks, further evidence of Chinese aggression has emerged from the US.

Senators Chuck Schumer and Tom Cotton have called for a ban for China Telecom and China Unicom to use US networks. China Mobile has already been facing difficulties in obtaining a licence to operate in the US, though this further expands the scrutiny which is being placed on Chinese companies.

In a letter to the FCC, Schumer and Cotton have suggested the two telcos, both of which have direct links to the Chinese Government, could use networks to target US communications. They have also suggested the pair could use the licenses and exposure to US networks to reroute traffic through China.

Perhaps this is an incident which many should have expected, but it does demonstrate the US Government is taking a more comprehensive approach to tackling China, bringing more companies into the fray.

Last month, it was suggested the Department of Justice is attempting to put the brakes on a subsea cable which is being funded by Facebook and Google, as well as a Chinese partner. Dr Peng Telecommunication and Media Group does have ownership ties to the Chinese Government, though two US firms could get hit by collateral damage through this DoJ investigation.

All of these incidents indicate the aggression from the US Government is widening and becoming increasingly complex. The likes of ZTE, Alibaba, OnePlus and Xiaomi should perhaps be wondering when they will be dragging into the conflict.

IBC 2019: is 4K anything more than hype?

While some people are still unsure whether there is any value in downloading content in HD over SD, the 4K and 8K hype is continuing to build; but is there any point in it?

For the ‘man on the street’, technology often looks like another language. Acronyms are a speciality of the TMT industry, and each day there seems to be another buzzword to keep track of. And when you look the development of the content world, paying particular attention to 4K and 8K, you have to wonder what the point actually is.

Mike Zink, VP of Technology at Warner Bros, summed up the point pretty simply. Having just been to IFA in Berlin, Zink commented that almost every stand had an 8K TV on it. It is a product which is increasingly getting pushed onto consumers, but there is very little 8K content to actually justify the expenditure on the new technology.

Some analysts and commentators might suggest that it is a sensible decision for the consumer to purchase a product which is laden with future-proofed technology, however we think it is simply a ruse to bleed as many dollars out of already strained wallets.

And when you look at the numbers, the market penetration of 4K (we’re not even going to look at 8K right now) is steadily creeping up, but it is not as high as you would expect.

Maria Rua Aguete of IHS Markit estimates market penetration of 4K TVs across Europe is 46%. North America exceeds this percentage, though penetration drops to 42% when you look at China and further down to 19% in Japan. The consumer is being subjected to an assault of 8K messaging, though the 4K evolution is still a work in progress.

Another challenge which the industry faces is a lack of 4K content. In Europe, there is 4K content, though it is one of the few areas where the expenditure is partially justified by experience.

Without the content, is there any point in a 4K TV purchase? And if the market penetration does not increase, will the content creators be swaying into the additional expense of creating 4K content? It is a chicken and egg situation, where those who have been convinced to purchase a 4K TV are ending up in a suspect position.

Perhaps this is a reality check which some in the industry will welcome. The telcos, for instance, which be scratching their heads to figure out how they deliver the desired consumer experience. The increased consumption of video is already placing strain on the network, and 4K/8K would certainly make the creaks louder.

This is perhaps something which the content industry is missing. There is an expectation the infrastructure will be there to deliver the experience, though this might not always be the case.

The telcos are under some pretty severe pressure at the moment. Not only do they have to worry about the deployment of 5G networks, a pretty expensive job to say the least, there are demands on the home broadband side as well. If more consumers are expecting 4K content in their living room, they might end up a bit disappointed.

Trends in the connectivity world are heading the right direction, ‘fibre-first’ is a mentality which is being championed by a huge number of telcos, but are these trends moving fast enough?

If you are thinking about buying a 4K/8K TV right now, it might not be worth the extra investment. Not only is the supporting content thin on the ground, but you should also seriously consider whether you have a broadband connection which can underpin the desired experience.

NBC’s opportunity to cut through the streaming noise with Olympics

With NBCUniversal set to launch its own streaming service in 2020 the risk of content fragmentation is becoming more apparent, but this only underlines the importance of a niche.

Although many of these streaming services might think they are doing something innovative or novel, in reality they are copycatting Netflix. The big issue is that Netflix is already moving onto the bigger and better. Original content is the new frontier, though NBCUniversal might have stumbled across another unique selling point.

“Peacock will be the go-to place for both the timely and timeless – from can’t-miss Olympic moments and the 2020 election, to classic fan favourites like The Office,” said Bonnie Hammer, Chairman of Direct-to-Consumer and Digital Enterprises business unit.

The Olympics, and live streaming sport on the whole, is an area which the streaming giants have largely ignored to date. Amazon has dabbled with tennis, NFL and has a few English Premier League games for the 2019/20 season, while Twitter (admittedly not a streaming service) has got a partnership in place with the PGA Tour. YouTube has toyed with some live events, but never nailed it. It’s a bit sporadic, rather than a coherent assault.

With the Tokyo 2020 Olympics, NBCUniversal has a great opportunity to carve a niche and create a unique position in streaming ecosystem.

Through the NBC Olympic channel, the company has produced every Summer Olympics since Seoul in 1988 and every Winter Olympics since Salt Lake City in 2002. It has all media rights on all platforms to all Olympic Games through to 2032, paying $7.75 billion (US rights) in 2014.

This is a major attraction for consumers around the world and could form the central cog of a new type of streaming service if the team plays its cards right. Olympics coverage averaged 27.5 million viewers across all platforms, with streaming growing particularly. Nearly more than 2.71 billion minutes of coverage was streaming from the Rio Olympics, more than double the previous two events combined.

This is what the new streaming challengers need to understand; they cannot replicate the success of Netflix.

Disruptors to a fast-evolving ecosystem often try to do this and it fails due to the rapidly changing landscape. Netflix found success in being a content aggregator, bringing together titles from a variety of different sources. This model is dead. It cannot be replicated.

The creation of Peacock is another sign of content fragmentation. From next year onwards, Netflix viewers will no-longer be able to view titles such as ‘The Office’, ‘Parks and Recreation’, ‘Brooklyn Nine-nine’ and ‘30 Rock’. This is a consequence of each of the newly emerging platforms. When HBO Max emerged, Netflix lost ‘Friends’, ‘The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air’ and ‘Pretty Little Liars’. With Disney+, all Marvel content will be removed from the Netflix library.

This is a dangerous position for any challengers. The Netflix model is dead because everyone wants to home their content exclusively. The value to the consumer of the aggregator model which drove Netflix in the early years is dwindling away as the content landscape becomes increasingly fragmented.

This is the importance of original content for the streaming services; it allows the creation of a selling-point beyond price. Admittedly, the Netflix original content will not appeal to everyone, but it has big enough budgets to create the breadth and depth, so each show does not have to be a catch-all, mass market product. Anyone who thinks they can compete with Netflix on original content will have to spend a lot of money to do so.

With coverage of the 2020 Election and the Tokyo Olympics on the NBCUniversal streaming platform, there is a notable opportunity to create a proposition which can cut through the noise.

Another very interesting opportunity for NBCUniversal is a fast-emerging trend in the content world; interactivity. This was a notable theme at IBC 2019, and sports presents an opportunity like few other genres.

Viewers could personalise their experience through the selection of different cameras or commentators. Value add content can be generated for months prior to the live-streaming of the event. Technologies such as virtual and augmented reality have a natural home in the sports ecosystem. Partnerships can be developed for additional monetization. There are endless troves of data points to engage every niche of viewer. The opportunity to build a more complete story all the way through the year is very evident.

The question is how aggressive NBCUniversal will be. Will it expand into other sports and live events? Will it look to drive engagement outside of the US market? These are unknowns and will largely be dependent on the delivery of the Tokyo Olympics, though it has a very good opportunity.

IoT Commercialisation Playbook

IoT is all about how data can be used to re-commercialise products into services. This re-commercialisation enables IoT enterprises to deliver higher levels of customer engagement and experience, whilst making cost savings and realising new revenue generation opportunities, which are critical for the return on investment of the IoT project.

There are a number of commercialisation models that are commonly seen in the market, and IoT projects often incorporate several of these models to ensure that the project is value-driven for all stakeholders.

Read this playbook to learn about:

  • The role of the lead enabler
  • The six most common IoT commercialisation models
  • How these models can be applied to real-life scenarios

 

75% of enterprise data expected to be processed on the edge by 2020

Industry experts participating in the Edge Computing Congress shared their views on how and when enterprises can benefit from edge computing.

Vodafone believes the market is quickly evolving from a centralised cloud to distributed cloud, expecting 75% of enterprise generated data will be processed outside of a centralised data centre by 2020.

This year’s Edge Computing Congress is being held in west London, where stakeholders on the value-chain are bouncing ideas off each other on how edge computing will impact the industry and how to capture opportunities brought about by the evolution of computing from the centre to the edge.

In a recent Telecoms.com Intelligence report, we predicted that 5G will help push edge computing from a small group of early adopters to be embraced by a much larger number of companies. This prediction is largely confirmed on Day 1 of the conference.

According to Vodafone’s data, shared by Simon Withers (pictured), the company’s Head of Digital Solutions Design, 27% of businesses are already implementing edge, and a further 18% plan to do so in the next year. The operator also predicted that, as a result of the trend towards edge cloud, 90% of customer deployments will be critically dependant on latency and bandwidth, the key technology properties 5G will offer.

To serve the fast-moving market, Vodafone is pursuing a multi-cloud strategy and is offering enterprise customers with two different solutions: dedicated and distributed. Withers also shared a few use cases the operators is working on with its partners, including supporting connected factory with dedicated edge, next generation retail with augmented reality on the edge, and worker insights through augmented operation.

Edge computing does not have to wait for 5G to happen. One of the most broadly adopted edge computing cases is private LTE for campus, for enterprise, etc. Yet this is an area that has become controversial to telecom operators. A representative from another big European operator believed private LTE, and in the future private 5G, may prove a new business opportunity for mobile operators if it is a network slice bought from the generic mobile network.

It would be a challenger if it was operated independently—for example the discussion in Germany that 5G frequencies could be awarded locally to private networks. However what worries the operator the most, according to the representative, is the webscale companies (AWS, Google, Microsoft) getting frequencies and offering services on the edge. This is already happening. Amazon has filed to FCC to expand its test on 3.5GHz band and, as Light Reading reports, this could be related to Amazon’s plan to “offer cloud-native, private mobile networks in the CBRS band to developers, telecom operators, public sector operators, enterprises and others.”

Another sign that there still lacks consensus on edge computing presented itself when a straw poll was conducted on the conference participants by the speaker from STL Partners, a consulting firm. When asked to choose the leading benefit of edge computing, two came on top, both at 25%, which are “enabling low-latency applications” and “data localisation, security and sovereignty”. Reducing connection cost to the central cloud, which the presenter expected to be high on the list, and we highlighted in our recent report, came joint last, selected by only 5% of the conference attendees.

The top five markets to watch in the Asia-Pacific MVNO sector

Telecoms.com periodically invites third parties to share their views on the industry’s most pressing issues. In this article, Helen Gaden of the MVNOs Series talks us through some of the key findings of a recent report they conducted into the Asia-Pacific MVNO market.

The Asia-Pacific region is alive with examples of every single nuance that plays a role in the MVNO industry – positive, open regulatory environments, and those that shut the door on virtual operators completely, highly successful symbiotic relationships with MNOs and monopolistic wholesale markets that strangle innovation and opportunity, MVNOs extending their reach into new markets, into new services, driving value with new business models, and embracing new technologies. Look to the APAC region and you can see it all.

The only problem with such enormous size and diversity is that it can be difficult to see the picture in full, or even to know where to look. However, there are certainly some key countries which emerge as key markets to watch; that standout as impressive growth drivers for MVNOs. In fact, there are five to be specific: China, Australia, Singapore, Japan and Vietnam.

Starting with the former, China’s MVNO sector finally seems to be finding its feet. With the entire Chinese mobile ecosystem adding an estimated $750bn to the country’s economy in 2018, equivalent to 5.5% of its GDP, China is certainly a nation where mobile technology takes central stage in economic strategy. And after testing the waters with an initial MVNO license trial in 2014, the Chinese government finally decided it had seen enough to make the experiment permanent last year, opening up licenses to international players for the first time as it looks to increase competition in the market.

As Renato Andrade Reis points out, China already represents a huge success story for MVNOs in that the 5% share Chinese MVNOs have of the country’s 1.2 billion mobile subscriptions has been achieved against the background of some hostile market conditions. “In China the market has developed despite the issues on pricing that in the beginning were complicated due to heavy competition from the local operators,” he said. “Growth has been based innovation – gaming, VAS, extra features. Chinese MVNOs really do present something of a white paper strategy example.”

In Australia, likewise, the market has grown substantially. As Gary Bhomer, founder and principal at Sydney-based firm Tel-Consult, points out: the growth in the Australian MVNO market “shows no signs of abating, with several new entrants on the way. Over the past two years MVNOs have taken an additional 3% market share and now account for a total of 13%.

“We’re seeing more non-traditional telco’s launch mobile propositions as an extension of brand. For established brands, an MVNO strategy can be a good way to extend an existing brand into a new segment, and provide a compelling way to interact and cross sell / up sell as well as leverage unique insights into your customer base. Recent examples include Nu Mobile, owned by Macquarie Bank, which has aggressive plans and second hand handsets as their key differentiator (Boost Mobile also recently launched second-hand device sales).“Other pending launches include Circles.life who are expecting to launch in the coming months following on from their success in Singapore, having also recently launched in Taiwan and planning at least two other Asian market launches.

Onto Singapore: their MVNO market has experienced one of the fastest rates of growth anywhere in the region over the past couple of years. Spearheaded by Circles.Life, one of the big MVNO success stories anywhere in Asia, virtual operators’ share of market climbed to 3% by the end of 2018, after the first virtual operators launched only two years previously.

While Circles.life embarks on aggressive expansion plans into other regional territories, 2019 has seen a succession of new MVNO launches in Singapore itself. The trend seems to be for larger telcos using the MVNO model to launch sub-brands targeting younger consumers, with examples including Giga, owned by the MNO StarHub, and Grid Mobile, a joint venture between Singtel and ST Telemedia. International players are getting in on the scene, too, with Malaysian brand redONE launching a subsidiary in Singapore ahead of planned roll outs in Vietnam and Thailand too.

But it isn’t just MVNOs that are adding to the competitive nature of Singapore’s mobile industry, either. Australian operator TPG Telecom last year became the fourth MNO running a network in the city state’s condensed mobile market, and announced its arrival with a low-cost SIM-only offer.

Across the pond in Japan, where more than 80 active MVNOs operate and over 18 million SIM connections are active, the Japanese virtual operator sector is one of the longest-standing and most developed across the APAC region. It has also enjoyed one of the most sustained periods of growth of any market – since 2014, Japanese MVNOs have more than doubled their share of mobile subscriptions, with the figure standing at 10.6% at the end of 2018.

During the same period, mobile ARPUs fell by 9%, which industry research consultancy Analysys Mason says compares favourably with the rest of the region. So while a growth in MVNO market share tends to be associated with falling prices due to increased competition and discounting strategies, Japan’s MVNOs have been able to grow share with theoretically better margins than most.

A couple of Japanese brands to draw attention to include the IIJmio consumer brand, which boasts 1.074m subscribers, and Rakuten Mobile, which has 1.5 million subscribers and recently announced the takeover of fellow Japanese MVNO DMM Mobile for US$21.2m.

On the other side of the coin, Vietnam is one of the youngest MVNO markets anywhere in the APAC region. In fact, the country’s first virtual operator launch took place as recently as April 2019. But after nearly a decade of frustrated attempts to get MVNOs off the ground in a nation of 95.5 million people, largely because of apparent reluctance on the part of the country’s MNOs to switch focus to wholesale services, there is now real hope that the model could take off in a big way over the coming years.

The pioneer Indochina Telecom Company (Itelecom), for example, has agreed a deal with carrier VinaPhone, mobile subsidiary of telecoms giant VNPT. Itelecom is reported to be focusing its initial service offerings on industrial workers in nine provinces and cities. Malaysia’s redONE, meanwhile, has plans to become the country’s second virtual operator by October this year.

The country also has a young, tech-savvy population, with high rates of smartphone penetration backed up by a fast, extensive 4G network. This, naturally, bodes well for hopeful MVNOs. Whilst the big carriers, Viettel, VNPT (through is Vinaphone brand) and MobiFone operate in a saturated market which has experienced flat growth for the past five years, the kind of service innovation and differentiation brought by MVNOs looks the main route to returning the mobile sector to growth.

 

For a more insights on this, download the free MVNOs Series report

NTT Docomo set to ditch Huawei phones over Android fears – report

Japanese operator group NTT Docomo will not offer Huawei smartphones when it launches its 5G network next year, according to a report.

The scoop comes courtesy of Nikkei Asian Review, which chatted to some NTT execs that preferred to keep it on the QT. The reason for this sudden reticence is fairly simple: if Google pulls the plug on Android support for Huawei phones the operator doesn’t want to be stuck with thousands of very expensive bricks that nobody wants to buy.

If this is true then it sets a very alarming precedent for Huawei, especially if the other Japanese operators follow suit. Japan was apparently Huawei’s fifth largest market last year and is right in the middle of the geopolitical arm wrestle between the US and China that has forced Google’s hand when it comes to Android support for Huawei phones.

The Nikkei Asian Review is on good form today, having also learned that Softbank is hoping to launch its 5G network two years ahead of schedule. How great an achievement this is, however, is open to debate, since many 5G networks around the world are already live. If the original projection by Softbank was that it wasn’t going to get its 5G act together until 2022 then it just as well it has belatedly pulled its socks up.

Opinion: The 5G future of operations will be automated

In the past, it would have been odd to suggest that communication service providers (CSPs) should model their operations on an e-commerce retailer like Amazon. One might initially believe that the two don’t have much in common, yet today’s customers expect an experience as seamlessness and efficient as that of Amazon from all companies; with the dawn of 5G and the automation it enables, CSPs can finally deliver it. In other words, CSPs must embed automation in every aspect of their operations and become “automation-native”.

Becoming “automation-native”

Today, industries are reaching the limit of their ability to create value for the consumer market. Instead, the next frontier of digital opportunity will be advancing productivity and innovation for industry and enterprises, and a new control point will be needed to address those opportunities – one that delivers business agility, enables new business models and an automation-native culture.

With new business models, CSPs can build a value play that is ecosystem-led instead of connectivity-led and the 5G era will provide the foundation to support such ecosystems. In turn, the new operations control point will play a critical role in enabling it.

The static, open-loop operational systems currently being used today are simply not built to handle this. Operating in “digital time” – that is, the in-the-moment nature of business today – requires intelligent, on-demand, closed-loop processes that drive end-to-end lifecycle management of digital services over a software-based network.

Limitless applications

Companies need to bring orchestration and assurance together and break the current boundaries of service design, data models and topology in order to provide the capability for dynamic innovation. It will need to be approached one step at a time, but seeing it through will allow CSPs to build end-to-end service lifecycle processes based on their new operational capabilities that will offer more complex services than is possible today.

Here’s how this might look in practice: A CSP could assign a “slice” of its 5G network to a gaming company so that company can provide online games with guaranteed low latency and network availability to its own subscribers. The CSP’s automated operations monitor the performance of the slice and make sure service level agreements (SLAs) are met — optimizing on the fly when adjustments are needed.

Meanwhile, on the industrial side, a CSP could apportion some of its network to a robotics company that automates industrial processes — again, using its dynamic operational capabilities to make sure the company’s platform performs in the field.

There are even applications in the saturated consumer market. For example, if and when the concept of the connected home comes to fruition, it will offer similar automation opportunities for CSPs.

Networks of the Future

In order to embed automation into operations and unleashing dynamic innovation, service providers will be required to reimagine network architecture and digital platforms. 

“Automation-native” operations will require a network architecture that combines solutions, software and services to support innovative business models not only for CSPs but also third-party enterprises who can build the network into their offerings for consumers or other businesses. A zero-touch network with end-to-end service automation and autonomous programmable networking represents a vision for future dynamic operations that is made possible through 5G.

Interested in hearing industry leaders discuss subjects like this? Attend the co-located IoT Tech Expo, Blockchain Expo, AI & Big Data Expo, and Cyber Security & Cloud Expo World Series with upcoming events in Silicon Valley, London, and Amsterdam.

Apple and Ireland begin appealing €14.3bn tax bill

Lawyers representing Apple and the Irish Government has begun their arguments in the EU’s lower General Court in an attempt to protect the suspect corporate tax environment.

In 2016, the European Commission ordered the Irish Government to collect back-taxes off Apple to the tune of €14.3 billion, including interest. Apple does not want to pay tax. Ireland does not want to collect it. Europe wants a level playing field. The lawyers are looking forward to nuance to bolster their bank accounts.

During the opening arguments, Apple’s lawyers suggested the European Commission decision “defies reality and common sense,” according to Reuters. Both the iPhone manufacturer and the Irish Government will argue against the decision to tax environment contravenes state aid rules.

Let’s be clear. Ireland is a tax haven. It is facilitating corporate tax avoidance. It is helping corporates collect greater profits without rewarding the societies they strain. Irish Government officials should be embarrassed they are helping technology giants abuse its European partners, the very same European partners which bailed it out of financial doomsday a decade ago.

This is a selfish position, and just at the time when the country is looking to Europe to protect it as Brexit looms large on the horizon.

Some might argue the Irish Government is entitled to charge whatever tax it wants. However, a modern society works because the general public and corporations pay taxes. It pays for roads, schools, hospitals, police officers and postal workers. There are technology giants out there who are asking consumers to strain their wallets further each year and care less about their right to privacy, but they are not willing to contribute to the societies which are fuelling the monstrous profits reported every three months.

With international borders being broken down, much to the distaste of some, irregular taxation policies can be taken advantage of. This is what is happening here. It beggars belief that Ireland can argue the benefits of the single economy, and still maintain this position, weakening the position of partners, depriving them of much needed taxes.

This is not the position the European Commission has taken, but it is the one each of Ireland’s partners in Europe should. Why should Ireland be able to collect all the benefits of Apple’s assaults on the European digital economy when it is citizens of every other nation which is fuelling the iLeader’s growth?

For some, it might sound bizarre that the Irish Government doesn’t want to collect €14.3 billion off Apple, but there are two reasons for this.

Firstly, if the Irish lawyers were not to fight back against the enforced tax run, it is effectively conceded to the assertion that it is a corporate tax haven. The last thing the Irish Government wants to do is admit that it is helping the already richly rewarded residents of Silicon Valley rip-off neighbouring governments further with creative tax strategies.

Secondly, Ireland needs to ensure it is viewed as a friendly corporate-tax environment moving forward if it is to continue to attract corporations to its borders. Ireland doesn’t necessarily have the best talent, it doesn’t have the largest economy and it doesn’t have a local supply chain for manufacturing. It needs a plug to interest the likes of Apple, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Twitter, Pinterest, PayPal and Amazon to house their European HQ in the country.

The value of the technology industry to both the Irish Government and society should not be undervalued. The Irish economy entered severe recession in 2008, and then an economic depression in 2009. The country was in tatters, though it was saved by the technology industry.

Over the last decade, technology giants thrived in the tax haven, creating new jobs directly and indirectly, and continues to be one of the biggest drivers today. Silicon Docks is as important to Dublin as Silicon Valley is to California.

That said, the European Commission does not agree this dynamic should be allowed to continue.

Should the Irish Government continue this favourable tax regime for certain companies, a competitive advantage is offered. The Commission, ably led by Margrethe Vestager, has been tackling anti-competitive business practises for years. If such a monstrous company like Apple is given a competitive advantage, state aid to run riot, start-ups will always be on the back-foot. Competition will likely never emerge, and the consumer will be in a precarious position.

Over the next couple of days, lawyers representing Apple and the Irish Government will argue against the opinion of the European Commission, attempting to overturn an order to collect back-taxes and create a more reasonable tax environment. It will argue that it is perfectly reasonable for it to help Apple bleed the consumer dry and then hide profits from governments who are asking for a fair contribution back to society to pay nurses.

Ireland should be embarrassed.