affordability, market concentration, and inefficiencies in the wholesale and broadband markets. P. 79. Moreover the Final Decision notes that the Commission remains concerned about the lack of competition in the intramodal stand-alone voice and broadband markets. P. 80. Rejecting the objections to the carriers’ use of the HHI analysis, the Final Decision relies on the HHI measure, along with data and analysis from experts like Dr. Roycroft and ORA and other intervenor witnesses, as one of several tools to measure levels of competition and competitive impact on the market. P. 12, PP. 53, 55. Direct Testimony of Trevor Verified 7. Market Definition- wireless Roycroft on behalf of TURN in substitution response to Information A necessary pre-condition to the Requests, June 1, 2016, investigation into Commission’s pp. 28-36, 65. competition in the voice and broadband markets in California is a clear set of Rebuttal Testimony of Trevor market definitions, including the Roycroft, July 15, 2016, identification of market substitutes. The pp. 9-11. issue of substitutability between wireline Direct Testimony of Debra and wireless voice, for example, was the Aron on behalf of AT&T, subject of much debate in this at pp. 26. proceeding. TURN Opening Brief, Dr. Roycroft submitted testimony on the pp. 9-13. issue of whether wireline and wireless Final Decision at pp. 9, 28, voice services can be considered 37-44, 72. substitutes. If the services are competitive substitutes, then any competition analysis would have to include both wireline and wireless voice services. In his testimony, Dr. Roycroft acknowledged that consumers appear to treat wireless voice services as competitive substitutes to traditional wireline services. However,
affordability, market concentration, and inefficiencies in the wholesale and broadband markets. P. 79. Moreover the Final Decision notes that the Commission remains concerned about the lack of competition in the intramodal stand-alone voice and broadband markets. P. 80. Rejecting the carriers’ objections to the use of the HHI analysis, the Final Decision relies on the HHI measure, along with data and analysis from experts like Dr. Roycroft and ORA and other intervenor witnesses, as one of several tools to measure levels of competition and competitive impact on the market. P. 12, PP. 53, 55. 7. Market Definition- wireless substitution A necessary pre-condition to the Commission’s investigation into competition in the voice and broadband markets in California is a clear set of market definitions, including the identification of market substitutes. The issue of substitutability between wireline and wireless voice, for example, was the subject of much debate in this proceeding. Dr. Roycroft submitted testimony on the issue of whether wireline and wireless voice services can be considered substitutes. If the services are competitive substitutes, then any competition analysis would have to include both wireline and wireless voice services. In his testimony, Dr. Roycroft acknowledged that consumers appear to treat wireless voice services as competitive substitutes to traditional wireline services. However, Direct Testimony of Trevor Roycroft on behalf of TURN in response to Information Requests, June 1, 2016, pp. 28-36, 65. Rebuttal Testimony of Trevor Roycroft, July 15, 2016, pp. 9-11. Direct Testimony of Debra Aron on behalf of AT&T, at pp. 26. TURN Opening Brief, pp. 9-13. Final Decision at pp. 9, 28, 37-44, 72. Verified
183284931.docx