GSM Wireless CEO Responds

Response to Californian Congressman Darrell Issa’s letter to the Honorable Donald Rumsfeld, US Secretary of Defence from Rob Conway ( INSET ), CEO of the GSM Association and Member of its Board.

“Congressman Issa’s intervention that GSM is an ‘outdated French standard’ is as ill-timed as it is misinformed.

The right time to debate the technology will be when the real conflict is over. And at that time we should look at the real facts, not the Congressman’s ill advised opinion. To suggest that GSM is simply a European or French standard is, in the current climate, quite outrageous.

GSM stands for ‘Global System for Mobile Communications’ and its users can roam throughout the world on the same phone with the same number.

GSM is used by almost one billion consumers and on every continent of the world, with 550 operators across 193 countries.

GSM is a worldwide standard accounting for 72 per cent of the digital wireless market today.

GSM is an ‘open standard’, which means any manufacturer from any country can make GSM equipment on a ‘level playing field’ – including North American companies such as Motorola, Lucent and Nortel. Global manufacturers supporting this open standard include Samsung, Panasonic, NEC, Toshiba, Nokia, Ericsson, Mitsubishi, Siemens and many more.

Major network operators in the USA offer GSM services such as AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless, T-Mobile USA and in Canada it is provided by Microcell.

GSM is already deployed in every country in the Arab World – CDMA is not deployed in any.

GSM was installed in Afghanistan post-war by an American company (TSI of New York) after a full tender process.

Today, there are more than 20 Arab countries with GSM networks and 60 million customers in the region. Iraq, of course, has been under UN Sanctions and therefore has not been able to purchase GSM technology.

Therefore, the suggestion that CDMA technology be deployed in Iraq post war is completely at odds with the rest of the region and the majority of the world. It would add to the country's isolation and arguably be at odds with the overall war effort.

I can’t believe someone has started this debate at this time, and I certainly can’t believe it has been started from such a false position and on such nationalistic terms.”

==============================================================

This is the article that triggered the GSM response.

The petition by a Californian Congressman to favour CDMA over GSM to build a mobile network in post-war Iraq misrepresents some of the facts surrounding these two wireless
technologies, says Ovum the analyst and consulting company.
Ovum does not provide political analysis, but as an expert in the wireless
industry world-wide, it is able to comment on the Congressman's points
regarding wireless technology.

Michael Doherty, research director based Ovum's Boston office, explains some
key points in the GSM vs CDMA debate:

* Scandinavian and Dutch mobile operators (not French) first proposed
a new digital cellular standard (to become GSM) to allow for intra-European
roaming and to handle the increasing demand for wireless services in Europe.
This collaboration enabled Europe to take a lead in promoting wireless among
its population and introducing early wireless innovations such as text
messaging. In contrast, the US developed a patchwork of competing standards
(including GSM), making roaming and interoperability difficult and
inhibiting wireless growth.

* The original French name, 'Groupe Speciale Mobile', has long been
discarded in favour of 'Global System for Mobile [Communications]', which
reflects the global nature of the standard while retaining the familiar
acronym GSM.

* By the end of 2002, there were over 786 million GSM subscribers, or
69% of total wireless subscribers worldwide. GSM has moved beyond its
European roots to become the dominant wireless technology in most of the
world's nations. In the US, wireless operators AT&T Wireless, Cingular, and
T-Mobile have chosen to deploy a GSM-based technology (GPRS) for their
next-generation networks. US wireless infrastructure companies such as
Motorola are active in developing GSM-based devices for use in the US and in
foreign markets.

* Congressman Darrell Issa refers to CDMA as "technically superior" to
GSM, but does not indicate how he is comparing the two. Indeed, both have
their adherents. CDMA has a larger talk range, requiring a smaller number
of cell sites to cover the same area as a GSM system and subjective customer
surveys (in the US) have often found CDMA to offer higher voice quality. On
the other hand, GSM offers longer 'talk time' and 'standby time' on its
devices, and of course, allows for extensive international roaming.
* Most importantly, in Ovum's opinion, is the fact that GSM is the
dominant technology in Iraq's neighbouring countries of Turkey, Israel,
Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. Building a GSM network in Iraq is a better
solution for future roaming capability and device interoperability, very
important in integrating Iraq economically into the region. More
practically, US soldiers using CDMA devices in Iraq would still need to use
GSM phones when they are back in regional bases outside the country.
"The irony in all this is that the GSM and CDMA camps are partnering more
than ever before," says Doherty. "The wireless industry now realises that
subscribers care less about the technology than about the services the
technology enables and how much it costs. Industry players see value in
partnering with others to strengthen their own business plans. Solutions
are global and collaboration is key."