Trai satellite spectrum charges 'non-rational,' say telcos

TRAI

India’s top telecom operators have voiced serious concerns over the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s (Trai) recent proposals for satellite communication (satcom) spectrum pricing, an Economic Times report said on Monday. Described the suggested rates as “unjustifiably low,” the Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) has slammed the pricing for being based on opaque and irrational assumptions, the ET report said citing the letter.

This marks the first formal response by telecom companies to Trai’s recommendations, which were released last month. The three leading telcos argue that implementing these proposals without modification would distort market fairness and potentially threaten the viability of terrestrial telecom networks.

In a joint letter addressed to the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) and other relevant ministries and regulators—including the Finance Ministry, Ministry of Commerce, MeitY, and NITI Aayog—COAI, along with executives from Jio, Vodafone Idea, Bharti Airtel and satellite industry representatives, outlined their objections.

They claim the proposed satcom spectrum pricing lacks transparency and is grounded in speculative, non-factual estimates. According to the letter, the charges suggested by Trai are even lower than those currently applied as administrative fees for VSAT services operating on geostationary satellite systems—services that do not compete with terrestrial telecom networks.

The operators argue that Trai has overlooked the full potential of satellite services while overvaluing the reach of terrestrial networks. They believe this imbalance could lead to an unfair competitive landscape. One of their key objections is the recommendation to allocate spectrum at 4% of adjusted gross revenue (AGR) over a five-year period, with no upfront payment required. This, they argue, undercuts the pricing norms currently applicable to other services.

Operators also took issue with Trai’s market forecasts, calling them inconsistent with current consumer demand trends. They noted that the recommendations rely on flawed subscriber data, confusing the number of DTH receivers with actual users. Additionally, they criticized the suggestion to allow satellite broadband providers to bill customers in U.S. dollars, arguing that this could unfairly benefit global players at the expense of domestic telecom firms.