A Telecom Farce in Thailand: Spectrum Auction Marred by Failures and Favoritism

The process has ignited serious concerns about the NBTC’s ability to manage this crucial allocation of national resources in a fair and transparent manner, ultimately jeopardizing the future of Thailand’s telecom landscape.

Initially, the NBTC’s protracted delay in producing a spectrum management plan for 2025 cast a long shadow of uncertainty over the telecom sector. This sluggishness hindered business planning and investment for both the traditional Mobile Network Operators (MNO) and the Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNO), impeding strategic decision-making and dampening investor confidence.

The subsequent auction design, presented by a foreign consultant, further fueled skepticism. Analysts pointed to a lack of understanding of the dynamics of the Thai telecom market, the basics of the MVNA, MVNE, MVNO ecosystem, the rush to auction multi-bands to only two bidders, as well as the highly questionable suggestion to use the Thai market, as a test rat for an unproven concept of “Thailand Independent Market Operator” or TIMO.

The NBTC revised the design and initiated a public hearing process. While the first hearing generated a multitude of concerns from the public and various stakeholders, the NBTC’s response was to schedule a second hearing with undue haste.

Announcing the April 1st hearing on Thursday, March 27th, provided stakeholders with a mere two working days to prepare – a stark contrast to the standard 30-day notice period for such critical consultations.

Alarmingly, the agenda for this second hearing failed to address the substantive issues raised during the first, focusing instead on technical aspects like band bundling, reserve pricing, and payment terms.

Adding insult to injury, the day after the second hearing, the NBTC extended yet another invitation to MVNOs for a discussion on promoting their role in Thailand – a recurring exercise with a history of yielding zero results.

The timing of this invitation was particularly blatant, as the deadline for submitting comments on MVNO focus group hearing was set for April 22nd, a full four days after the NBTC board is scheduled to make its final decision on the spectrum auction.

This effectively excludes any meaningful MVNO input from the board’s crucial decision-making process, further solidifying concerns about the NBTC’s responsiveness and commitment to an inclusive process.

The procedural missteps are compounded by the statements after the first auction hearing from Mr. Sompop Purivigraipong, the NBTC’s commissioner for telecommunications.

His swift agreement with the two dominant mobile operators, Advanced Info Service (AIS) and True Corporation, regarding their concerns about the starting price of the auction, while completely ignoring the broader concerns raised by other stakeholders and the public, raised questions about regulatory impartiality.

If the NBTC proceeds with its multi-band auction without addressing these wider issues, it risks solidifying the existing duopoly of AIS and TRUE, stifling competition and innovation within the Thai telecom market for the next 15-years.

The integrity of the upcoming auction is further undermined by the NBTC’s demonstrable failure to enforce its own regulations over the past decade.

A prime example is the decade-long inaction regarding mandatory access to Mobile Virtual Network Aggregators (MVNAs) and Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs).

Regulations introduced years ago, mandating that spectrum license holders provide wholesale access to these entities to foster market diversification and consumer choice, have been consistently ignored by the major MNOs (AIS, TRUE/DTAC) with zero repercussions from the NBTC.

This lack of enforcement has directly contributed to the current market dominance of AIS and TRUE, limiting consumer options, driving up prices, and leading to increased complaints about service quality.

The plight of National Telecom (NT), the state-owned enterprise that has historically been the only MNO to host MVNOs, further highlights this regulatory failure.

As part of the spectrum auction, NT will have to return significant portions of its spectrum, leaving it with minimal bandwidth and forcing it to cease support for its existing MVNO partners.

This directly impacts numerous businesses that have invested in the Thai market, contributing to the economy and fulfilling their part of their license obligations, only to be left stranded due to the NBTC’s inaction in ensuring network access from the dominant players.

The fact that the NBTC has sold more than 65 MVNO licenses (and continue to sell) for over a decade without ensuring the fundamental ability for these operators to launch their services, is a damning indictment of its regulatory oversight.

The participation of True Corporation (TRUE) in the upcoming auction also raises further critical questions regarding its compliance with both its original license conditions and the conditions imposed upon its merger with DTAC.

Despite the NBTC “acknowledging” the controversial merger over two years ago and issuing conditions including mandatory MVNO access (again) and a 12% average price reduction, TRUE has yet to demonstrably fulfill these obligations. MVNAs and MVNOs have officially requested access, but have been met with rhetoric and delays.

This blatant disregard for regulatory mandates and merger conditions should, at the very least, raise serious questions about TRUE’s eligibility to participate in the upcoming auction.

Allowing non-compliant operators to acquire further spectrum sets a dangerous precedent, signaling that regulatory obligations can be ignored with impunity.

Beyond regulatory failures and corporate non-compliance, the NBTC itself is facing a deepening governance crisis.

The legitimacy of its chairman has been called into question following a determination by the Senate’s Information and Communication Technology Commission that he lacked the necessary qualifications.

Despite this ruling, the chairman remains in office, casting a shadow over the legitimacy of the NBTC’s decisions.

Furthermore, allegations of judicial and political interference, as well as accusations of “state capture” by monopolistic corporate interests, have surfaced.

A legal case, giving 2 years prison to NBTC’s Broadcasting Commissioner and Board member, Dr. Pirongrong Ramasoota for her actions in relation to TRUE ID, has been criticized for potential political bias and state capture, raising concerns about politically motivated legal actions (SLAPP laws) designed to silence critics and manipulate regulatory decision-making.

The court decision against NBTC board member, Dr. Pirongrong Ramasoota is by many expected to put a damper on her board activities and decision making in cases involving TRUE. This means that the remaining six board members may end up on 3:3 split votes with the Chairman having the option to use his extra vote to eliminate the deadlock.

The same chairman who used his extra vote to indirectly give TRUE/DTAC the green light to merge, and the same chairman which the Senate Committee defacto fired 8 months ago.

The potential for the chairman’s casting vote to continue to sway crucial decisions, particularly in light of these controversies, raises serious concerns about the impartiality and fairness of the upcoming auction.

Thailand’s Consumers Council (TCC) has also voiced deep concerns about the NBTC’s regulatory shortcomings, arguing that the failure to enforce existing regulations undermines consumer rights and erodes public trust.

They emphasize that a fair and competitive market, fostered by effective regulation, is essential for ensuring affordable and high-quality telecommunications services for all Thai citizens.

The current duopoly market has already led to skyrocketing service fees, disappearing budget packages, and inconsistent network quality, directly impacting consumers, and on April 3, the Consumer Council submitted a letter to the NBTC (again), urging the postponement of the upcoming mobile spectrum auction.

A primary point of contention raised by the council is the inadequacy of the public hearing held on April 1st. The hearing failed to provide a sufficient platform for all stakeholders, particularly MVNO service providers, who rely on NT’s network for their operations.

Ithibun Onwongsa, Deputy Secretary-General of Thailand’s Consumer Council, underscored the significance of NT as a state enterprise, arguing that it functions as a public service. He cautioned that auctioning NT’s spectrum would compromise security during crises [such as the recent earthquake], and negatively impact vulnerable populations dependent on telephone and internet services. Additionally, it would further diminish competition within the telecommunications market.

“Therefore, the NBTC should consider the conditions for allocating frequencies to government agencies without using the auction method to provide public services, which will truly benefit consumers,” Onwongsa stated.

The earthquake that hit Myanmar on the 28th March, further highlighted issues with the NBTC. A SMS that was supposed to be sent to the people in Thailand was delayed several hours and even then, only arrived on about 10 million mobile phones.

The PM was one of those who did not get the SMS and the following day NBTC was taken out of the process. In addition, in the hours after the earthquake TRUE/DTAC users could not make or receive voice calls from AIS users and vice versa, highlighting the major problem of Single Point of Failure by having only two networks.

Given this confluence of regulatory failures, corporate non-compliance, and a deepening governance crisis, proceeding with the spectrum auction in its current state would be a grave mistake.

It would only serve to further entrench the dominance of the existing duopoly, stifle competition, limit consumer choice, and undermine public trust in the regulatory framework.

Before any spectrum auction can proceed with legitimacy, the NBTC must prioritize comprehensive regulatory reform and address its internal governance issues.

This includes rigorously enforcing mandatory access for MVNAs and MVNOs, conducting a thorough and transparent review of TRUE’s merger compliance and taking appropriate action for non-compliance, strengthening consumer protection in collaboration with the TCC, and resolving the serious questions surrounding the qualifications and potential undue influence within its leadership.

Without these fundamental corrective measures, any new spectrum allocation will be built on a foundation of regulatory neglect and questionable governance, ultimately failing to serve the best interests of the Thai people and hindering the development of a truly competitive and dynamic telecom market.

The NBTC’s decade-long track record of failing to enforce its own regulations has significantly contributed to Thailand’s stagnant and monopolistic telecom market. Given this, the NBTC should not be entrusted with allocating further valuable national resources until it rectifies these fundamental issues.