The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Aliv has hailed industry regulators for taking its side in a billing dispute with the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) that could have threatened customer connectivity.

Damian Blackburn, pictured, the mobile provider's top executive, told Tribune Business that the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority's (URCA) ruling on termination rates for calls to BTC's fixed-line and VIBe numbers had provided "clarity" to the two rival providers.

"Billing disputes like this break out from time to time," he said. "It's complex business. We followed the process to the end, and are glad URCA have found what we said was correct all along. We're glad it's resolved and we all have clarity moving forward."

URCA intervened in the dispute after finding that the mobile competitors were unlikely to resolve it themselves. While neither company reported any negative impact to-date on customers or competition, URCA ruled that it could "in the near future pose a threat to any-to-any connectivity" if left unresolved.

The regulator thus initiated arbitration/dispute resolution-style proceedings for differences that erupted almost immediately following Aliv's launch of commercial mobile services in November 2016.

"The dispute centred on the fixed termination rate to be paid to BTC by Aliv for calls originating on Aliv's mobile network and terminating to BTC's fixed network," URCA said. "As Aliv's mobile phone numbers are non-geographic, the numbers cannot be used to identify the point of call origination from Aliv's network.

"BTC contended that this makes it difficult for BTC to apply the regulated fixed termination rates for intra (same island) and inter-island traffic from Aliv's network to BTC's network." Related issues included the termination rate Aliv should be paying on calls from its subscribers to BTC's VIBe (Voice over Internet) consumers; if a fixed call transit charge should; and measurement of incoming traffic from Aliv to BTC's fixed-line network.

The dispute erupted on February 1, 2017, when Aliv challenged "incorrect call termination rates" that BTC had alleged applied to calls made by its subscribers to BTC fixed-line numbers and VIBe customers.

The new mobile entrant argued that the call termination rates should be set at 0.75 cents and 2.01 cents per minute for calls to BTC's fixed-line and VIBe network, respectively. Yet BTC had applied a 2.48 cents per charge to both.

BTC responded three weeks later, acknowledging the VIBe call termination rate was incorrect and would be changed. However, it disputed Aliv's 0.75 cents per minute rate for calls terminating on its fixed-line network as it was unable to determine whether these were same-island or inter-island calls.

BTC has traditionally charged a higher termination rate for calls made between persons on different Bahamian islands, and Aliv subsequently "proposed a blended termination rate" split between 95 per cent of the 'same island' rate and 5 per cent of the 'inter-island' rate.

The second mobile operator then filed a 'Notice of Dispute', with the two sides then trading termination rate offers. BTC countered with its own "blended rate" split 62/38 between same island/inter-island charges, adding that a 2.5 cents per minute fee was "fair and justifiable".

With both sides sticking to their respective positions, Aliv finished the exchange with a September 11, 2017, letter that challenged BTC's definition of 'same island' and 'inter island' calls. While BTC based this on the location of calling and receiving parties, its rival said 'same island' calls "mean the same island as the point of interconnection" between their competing increases.

"Aliv contended that because it uses far-end handover technology, a call from an Aliv customer on Eleuthera, for example, to a BTC customer on Eleuthera would be interpreted as an off-island call because it has to go through a point of interconnection on New Providence," URCA explained.

"Conversely, a call from the Aliv customer on Eleuthera to a BTC customer on New Providence would be considered an on-island call due to the location of the point of interconnection."

Aliv also rejected BTC's demands for a 'transit charge' on calls between their networks, and argued that its 95/5 "blended" termination rate was justifiable because the majority of its customer base is located on New Providence. It stuck to its position that the termination rate for calls to BTC VIBe customer be pegged at 2.01 cents per minute.

BTC, in its submissions to URCA, accepted both the 2.01 cents per minute VIBe rate and that no transit fees were applicable. It also agreed to accept the regulator's proposed remedies dealing with the issue of 'same island' and 'inter island' call termination rates.

The regulator, in its determination, found that the 'same island' rate applies when BTC's fixed-line customer and the point of interconnection with Aliv's network are on the same island.

As a result, it ruled: "An Aliv mobile call to a New Providence-based fixed customer or Grand Bahama-based fixed customer shall be classified as an intra or 'on-island' call, irrespective of where the originating mobile customer is based when making the call.

"All other mobile-to-fixed calls would be classified as inter or off-island calls, irrespective of where the originating mobile customer is based when making the call. For the avoidance of doubt, an Aliv mobile call that is terminated on an island where there is no point of interconnection is an inter-island call."

URCA thus set the call termination rates at 0.75 cents and 1.13 cents per minute, respectively, for same-island and inter-island calls - the same charges Aliv had urged in its first letter on the dispute.