Privatization, Reforms and Firm’s Performance in Mobile Telecommunication Industry

Abstract

Although there has been much empirical research on the effects of privatization, competition and regulation on the telecommunications sector, very little empirical work was interested in studying these effects on mobile telecommunication sector. This chapter studies the effects of telecommunication reforms (privatization, competition and regulation) on mobile operator's performance in the OCDE area. 2. The dilemma of privatization Many economists, policy makers and corporate managers have long believed that private firms are more efficient than public ones. Privatization, defined as the sale of (total or partial) previously state-owned enterprises to private owners, is, so, assumed to increase the firm's efficiency and profitability because, on the one hand, the change in ownership structure shifts the privatized firm's objectives and the managers' incentives away from those imposed by politicians. The managers are then subordinate to them on monitoring and discipline of profit oriented investors. On the other hand, privatization may very well deter market competition since the incumbent is able to engage in anti-competitive behaviors. The public incumbent, instead, due to political oversight may suffer from inefficient operation in competing with the rivals. As a result, since the late of 1980s, several countries have undergone partial or full privatization of their utility sectors, especially telecommunications. In fact, until recently, in most countries, telecommunications service providers were state owned, state operated, and often monopolistic. The telecommunications sector was viewed as the quintessential public utility. Economies of scale, combined with political sensitivity, created large entry barriers and externalities. Since the 1980s, policy makers gradually began to recognize that telecommunications systems are an essential infrastructure for economic development. As the economy broadens and becomes critically dependent on vastly expanded flows of information, telecommunications acquires strategic importance for economic growth and development. Besides, rapid technological innovations in the past three decades have significantly reduced economies of scale and scope in this sector, attenuating the economic rationale for a state-owned natural monopoly in the Telecommunications sector. The solution was privatization which aims to break the monopoly and improve the efficiency and performance of the telecommunication industry. Theoretically, privatization affects the firm's performance through multiple channels. It might cause firms to operate more productively because managers are subjected to the pressures of the financial markets and to the monitoring and discipline of profit-oriented investors. In addition, the change in ownership structure of privatized firms shifts the firm's objectives and managers' incentives away from those that are imposed on them by politicians, toward those that aim to maximize efficiency, profitability, and shareholders' wealth. By going public, firms would have many entrepr...

Features of Income Formation of Telecommunications Market Organizations

“…The result of increasing the level of intensity of competition in the telecommunications market, which contributes to the innovative development and growth of market participants, is consistent with the empirical findings of David Bardey, Danilo Aristizábal, José Santiago Gómez, Bibiana Sáenz [4], Cecere G., Corrocher N., Battaglia R. [1], as well as such well-known foreign scientists as Dastidar K. [3], Fransman M. [6], Karamti C., Kammou A. [11]. This is also consistent with the empirical findings of Lehr W. [14], Nekmahmud M., Rahman S. [17], Ru C., Gupta R. [21], Stone M. [23] and others.…”

“…At the same time, as at the end of January 2021, there were 104,655 subscribers in Ukraine who exercised their right to freely choose a mobile operator by using the Number Portability Procedure (65,965 numbers were ported in 2020), which remained almost the same compared to 2020 and 2021, despite the introduction of martial law in the country. The transition of subscribers to cheap tariffs is explained by a decrease in the purchasing power of the population and encourages people to save in all areas[11][12][13].…”

Dynamic Competition in Telecommunications: A Systematic Literature Review

“…Privatization can enhance the firm’s performance and may not suffer from inefficient operation due to political oversight. It was proposed to eradicate the monopoly and develop the effectiveness of the telecommunication sector (Karamti & Kammou, 2011). AT&T ended its monopoly status by connecting the third-party device to its rented telephones in 1968 (“History of AT&T—Wikipedia,” 2021).…”

Telecommunications industry efficiency: A comparative analysis of high and middle income countries

“…On one hand, technological advancement has blurred the line between computers and telecommunications, creating competition from nontraditional platforms. On the other hand, regulatory reform in many countries have allowed the industry to rely more on market forces (Karamti & Kammoun, 2011;Li & Xu, 2004). Following deregulation in United Kingdom (UK) and United States (US) in the early 1980s, several developed and emerging economies have deregulated their telecommunications industries to promote competition and improve performance (Bortolotti, D'Souza, Fantini, & Megginson, 2002).…”