Market Entry in the Presence of a “Dominant” Network Operator in Telecommunications

Conference paper


The telecommunications sector can be considered an especially fascinating network industry. In spite of the enormous resistance shown by different interest groups in the early eighties, the period of partial entry liberalization will be completed by the end of 1997. The new Telecommunications Law in Germany which was passed in July 19962 will allow complete active and potential competition from early 1998. Market entry will then be possible not only in the areas of terminal equipment and value-added network services, but also in the voice telephony market and all other parts of the networks, including cable-based infrastructure. If the new Telecommunications Law is meant to exhaustively promote all possibilities of competition, the role of the market should not be hampered by unnecessary administrative or regulatory intervention. The extent of government regulation in telecommunications markets should therefore be restricted to a minimum and its continuing validity should be periodically reviewed


Market Power Market Entry Incumbent Firm Universal Service Network Industry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baumol, W. J., J. C. Panzar and R. D. Willig (1982), Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Blankart, CH. B. and G. Knieps (1989), What Can We Learn from Comparative Institutional Analysis? The Case of Telecommunications, Kyklos, Vol. 42, Fase. 4, pp. 579 – 598.Google Scholar
  3. Blankart, CH. B. and G. Knieps (1994), Das Konzept der Universaldienste im Bereich der Telekommunikation, Jahrbuch für Neue Politische Ökonomie, Vol. 13, pp. 238 – 253.Google Scholar
  4. Knieps, G. (1987), Zur Problematik der internen Subventionierung in öffentlichen Unternehmen, Finanzarchiv, N.F., Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 268 – 283.Google Scholar
  5. Knieps, G. (1995), Die Ausgestaltung des zukünftigen Regulierungsrahmens für die Telekommunikation in Deutschland, D.P. Nr. 22, Universität Freiburg: Institut für Verkehrswissenschaft und Regionalpolitik.Google Scholar
  6. Knieps, G. (1997), The Concept of Open Network Provision in Large Technical Systems, in: EURAS Yearbook of Standardization (EYS), Vol.1, 1997, pp.357– 369Google Scholar
  7. Knieps, G. and VOGELSANG, I. (1982), The Sustainability Concept under Alternative Behavioral Assumptions, Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 234 – 241.Google Scholar
  8. Kruse, J. (1996/11), Liberalisierung der Telekommunikation in Deutschland, Wirtschaftsdienst, pp. 73–80Google Scholar
  9. MestmÄcker, E.-J. and Witte, E. (1995), Gutachten zur Zuständigkeit für die Verhaltensaufsicht nach dem dritten und vierten Teil des Referentenentwurfs für ein Telekommunikationsgesetz (TKGE), Hamburg und München, 22. NovemberGoogle Scholar
  10. Monopolkommission (1996), Wettbewerbspolitik in Zeiten des Umbruchs, Hauptgutachten 1994/1995, Baden-BadenGoogle Scholar
  11. Owen, B. M. and Braeutigam, R. (1978), The Regulation Game — Strategie Use of the Administrative Process, Cambridge, Ma.Google Scholar
  12. Picot, A. and Burr, W. (1996), Regulierung der Deregulierung im Telekommunikationssektor, ZfbF (Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung), Vol. 48, Heft 2, pp. 173 – 200.Google Scholar
  13. Shankerman, M. (1996), Symmetric Regulation for Competitive Telecommunications, Information Economics and Policy, Vol. 8, pp. 3 – 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations