Elmar Zilles Head Broadcasting, Federal Network Agency, Germany

1. Elmar Zilles Head Broadcasting, Federal Network Agency, Germany The second dividend implementationor (much better):A Sustainable Approach For the Supply of Capacity for Mobile And Broadcasting Services in the UHF-Band TRANSITION TO DIGITAL TERRESTRIAL TELEVISION BROADCASTING, BORDERLINE FREQUENCY COORDINATION AND DIGITAL DIVIDEND Warsaw (RepublicofPoland), 7 – 9 May 2012

2. A reminder … • “Definition” • The Digital Dividend is understood as the additionalspectrum, which will become available as a consequence of the digitalisationand proper establishment of existing analogue services, based onnew, efficient transmission and coding technologies • A proper establishment takes into account all societal needs and is based on political decisions. • But: there is also a framework beyond … 2

3. The ITU framework • Starting points: ITU frequency allocation (WRC) and GE-06 • Binding for administrations versus administrations only, but not for internal way of use or for administration versusoperator • Co-allocation of mobile and broadcasting service • Primary rights possible for both of them • Existing rights of any (primary) service to be taken into account • Severe consequences for any country, depending on the neighbours´ decisions • The only way out: harmonisation 3

4. The situation as from now (1) • Different supply of number of programmes also to be considered!(Impact on “regulatory” capacity claim) 4

5. The situation as from now (2) • Implementation of Digital Dividend in 790 MHz to 862 MHz influenced by compatibility issues between mobile service, broadcasting service and other services (ARNS) • Relaxed situation for countries making use of up to four networks for terrestrial TV only • Implementation below 790 MHz even easier??? • Approach mainly based on the assumption:What can be delivered by broadcasters?No regard to “real” possibilities on mobile side!!! 5

6. The framework of claims (1) • What mobile operators tell you (long story told short): • development of traffic demand will soon exceed any limit • more spectrum needed • more spectrum needed • more spectrum needed • … • What they don´t tell you • from a certain point on no more exponential growth of traffic • calculated from their own figures, a “gift” of 100 MHz would help just a few months more, from a certain point of time 6

7. The framework of claims (2) • In detail… 7

8. The framework of claims (3) • “Poking” conclusion: Not even with all spectrum made available the networks will cope with the upcoming traffic demand (Spectrum gift doesn´t help!!!) • Additional means needed: • Additional density in network structures • Offload • Better technical spectrum efficiency • … • All of them to be done WITHIN a defined spectrum limit anyway! 8

9. The framework of claims (4) • Similar behaviour to be observed from broadcast operators • spectrum to be kept • spectrum to be kept • spectrum to be kept • … 9

10. The framework of claims (5) • About 30 programmes needed to satisfy recipientsto a 95 % extent on a platform (Impacts on the “recipients´” capacity claim) • For a future fixed reception situation: 8 Mbit/s (720p) to 20 Mbit/s (1080p) per stream needed; even much more in the near future (TV sets with 4k) • 240 to 600 Mbit/s downstream to large-sized TV sets; terrestrially very difficult even with DVB-T2 and H.264/AVC • Different conclusion for portable or mobile reception (smaller displays) • Different feeds for different application situations? • “Poking” conclusion: UHF for large-sized TV at all??? 10

11. How to “decide” on the resources (1) • In the analogue world… • One “best” technical solution for a certain problem • Efficiency increase by harmonisation • Harmonised ranges to be separated • Hence: definition of (different) radio services • Allocation of different frequency ranges to different radio services • Axiom: • “Separation” done based on decoupling on the physical level 11

12. How to “decide” on the resources (2) • And nowadays… • For broadcasting, portable and mobile reception situations get more and more important • For mobile networks, the transport of media content plays an increasing role • Assumption: services get much closer to each other • Physical “separation” no longer the most efficient approach • Axiom: • “Separation” to be done based on decoupling on the “logical” level!!! 12

13. How to “decide” on the resources (3) • Approach: Collaborative, not conflicting • Conflicting approach: broadcasters will lose slices from their“sausage” (“dividend I”, “dividend II”, …) • Better: • putting all demands together on one table • putting all resources together as well • define the framework of a commonly used network structure(no type of technical implementation preferred for the time being, great task for engineers!) • “Provocation” or not? In best case, from some future pointfor ALL UHF-band!!! 13

14. How to “decide” on the resources (4) • To be resolved: • Different business cases • Different tariffing models • Different coverage intentions • Different … • Solutions possible on a regulatory level 14

15. Flexible equitable access approach (1) • Frequency co-ordination strategies • Starting point: Distribution of frequency positions(agreements) • Following a certain pattern(ST61: rhombic, edges of 200 km – 250 km) • Efficient for a certain type of application (only)

16. Flexible equitable access approach (2) • Better flexibility by • defining a potential usage of a channel / block up to the border of country A, • the usage of country B being kept away from this border for a distance d • doing things the other way round for a different channel (equitable access) • d will depend on terrain AND technical conditions of applied systems

17. Flexible equitable access approach (3) Illustration d d To be achieved as an evolution of GE06, taking into account individual situations per country over a period Work already started in some regions!

18. OK, understood … and when? • Starting point: Individual situations • Administration A does a transition (duration x years), Administration B follows after y years (duration z years)  Transition losses by efforts to be taken and gains achieved • Situation holds for nearly all cases in the past! • Why not taking part in a process long in advance??? Join the party at the earliest point of time possible!!!

19. A crucial point… • Besides all • technical • regulatory • commercial • … • issues: WRC-15 should not be taken as singular point, nor as a final stage, but as the first step in a binding process

20. A first little step … Use of words may influence minds, so… This time, it is not a “dividend”! The circumstances are different. The approach should be different, too: A Sustainable Approach For the Supply of Capacity for Mobile And Broadcasting Servicesin the UHF-Band

21. Thankyouverymuch foryourattention! Elmar Zilles Elmar.Zilles@BNetzA.de www.bundesnetzagentur.de TRANSITION TO DIGITAL TERRESTRIAL TELEVISION BROADCASTING, BORDERLINE FREQUENCY COORDINATION AND DIGITAL DIVIDEND Warsaw (RepublicofPoland), 7 – 9 May 2012