The size of tariffs, as noted by the representative of the antimonopoly service,

[tanjimajuha20]

The press service of PJSC MTS informed a ComNews correspondent that MTS appealed to the FAS of Russia, since the State Unitary Enterprise Petersburg Metropolitan set unreasonably high tariffs for the placement of communication facilities in the metro.

"The FAS of Russia received applications from PAO MTS and PAO VimpelCom regarding the size of the tariff for the service of placing equipment and cables of mobile operators in malaysia whatsapp number database
tunnels, underground complexes and stations of the State Unitary Enterprise Petersburg Metro. The antimonopoly case is being considered. If the enterprise is found guilty of violating antimonopoly legislation, it will have to set economically justified tariffs for its services. Also, if guilt is established, the enterprise faces a turnover fine," the FAS press service told a ComNews correspondent.

The FAS has established that the tariffs for the service of placing equipment and cables of mobile operators in tunnels, underground complexes and metro stations of the State Unitary Enterprise "Petersburg Metro" are economically unjustified: the profitability of the service of placing equipment of mobile operators in the metro in the first half of 2022 amounted to 2420%.

is determined for each economic entity individually in accordance with the methodological recommendations for the formation of tariffs.

According to the FAS, the company’s actions create barriers to entry into the communications services market and prevent operators from building communications networks, which leads to an infringement of the interests of economic entities and limits competition in the market.

The FAS Russia notes that the actions of the metro also infringe on the interests of subscribers: passengers cannot use mobile communication services of proper quality in the metro due to the fact that operators have difficult access to the enterprise’s infrastructure.

As a result, the FAS of Russia initiated an antimonopoly case against the State Unitary Enterprise "Petersburg Metropolitan" for signs of violating paragraph 1, part 1, article 10 of the Law on the Protection of Competition. If found guilty, the enterprise faces a fine in accordance with article 14.31 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses.

"The proposed pricing conditions are holding back the development of the communications network. As a result, subscribers cannot receive high-quality modern communications services while in the St. Petersburg metro. With current tariffs, new construction is economically ineffective. MTS is constantly expanding and modernizing its infrastructure, including at transport facilities in all regions. We would like to have this opportunity in the St. Petersburg metro as well. The current prices are limiting us," a representative of the MTS press service told ComNews.

PJSC VimpelCom (Beeline), LLC T2 Mobile (Tele2), PJSC MegaFon refrained from commenting.

Denis Kuskov, CEO of Telecom Daily LLC (Telecom Daily publication), believes that the FAS took up this matter too late: attention should have been paid to the St. Petersburg metro two or three years ago or earlier, when only MegaFon was present there.

"For end users, there are no major problems with communications in the St. Petersburg metro: there is the MegaFon network and the network that VimpelCom, MTS and Tele2 built together. The internet speed characteristics are at a high level, although they are inferior to Moscow. In terms of how much operators are forced to pay, there is a problem. The metro is a state strategic facility, and tariffs for installing infrastructure should be based on a transparent policy," he added.

Leading analyst of Mobile Research Group Eldar Murtazin said that several years earlier there was a similar story in Moscow: operators wanted to install equipment in the Moscow metro, but the tariffs were very high. "The metro justified this by saying that it was a technically complex facility, and it was economically unprofitable for operators to build communication networks there. But if the city authorities want it, everything changes: if under Yuri Luzhkov this was impossible, then under Sergei Sobyanin, electricity tariffs and equipment placement became lower," he noted.

As Eldar Murtazin notes, the tariffs for operators that exist in St. Petersburg and other cities are currently hindering the development of communication networks. "The state should push the State Unitary Enterprise "St. Petersburg Metropolitan" to change its tariff policy, and Moscow's experience can be an example for other cities," he added.