 So let me welcome you to this panel discussion. The dialogue this morning started pointing in the direction of many of the topics we'll be covering in this window, which will focus on technology and the user experience, what's going to be the regional outlook. So what we're going to do is really deep dive into many of the questions that surfaced earlier today and try to put them into the perspective of our region, specifically in the Gulf. And very fortunate to have a very distinguished panelist with us representing pretty much the four corners of the industry we serve. In no particular order, and starting on my left, I've just marked as the director of corporate strategy and intelligence at QTEL International. So he'll bring the telecom service provider perspective. Next would be engineer Nashi Al-Kharusi, who's a full-time member of the telecom regulatory authority in Oman. We've heard this morning from myself and others regarding the expectations from policymakers and regulators. So I'm afraid engineer Nashi Al-Kharusi that will put you under the spot. You'll have to answer on behalf of all the policymakers. Next is Jeremy Foster. Jeremy is the marketing director for Ericsson Communication in the Middle East. So we'll have the industry of the technology angle to our discussion. And last but not least, Hamad Al-Manna. Hamad is the CEO of Knowledge Ventures in Qatar and a board member. And among other things, Hamad and his team have been investing in a number of ICT-related ventures, whether in connectivity and other premises. So I think this is a very, very comprehensive panel. In our discussion today, we'll be having a dialogue among the panelists. There won't be any PowerPoint presentation. The dialogue will be under Shatham House rule, i.e. what is said in this room will say in the room, it will not be attributed to anyone. In particular, I can appreciate that this will be quite challenging for the operator and the regulator. So I cannot give you my firm commitment, but my understanding is there won't be any headline tomorrow morning saying X has said Y and someone will be in trouble. So what I suggest we do, and this is meant to be interactive, so I would like to get as many questions as possible from the audience. And to start to warm up the discussion, what I've suggested or invited the different panelists to prepare some thoughts which they will provide us with around four angles. One, how and what technology will be best realistically rolled out in our part of the world to realize the broadband premise. We've heard this morning a number of ideas. We went through a number of examples from around the world. I think it's time to put it in the context of our economies and our terrain. And they can be quite different, whether you're operating in a country like Bahrain or in Doha or in Kuwait or on the other extreme if you're in Saudi Arabia or you're in the UAE or in Oman. So clearly the dynamics are going to be different. And at the same time, what are going to be the complementary enablers so that to make the roll out of any technology viable? The second question is around the broadband access devices. What is going to be their likely evolution in our part of the world? What is going to be this ubiquitous, this AHA access device that will pretty much bring broadband to a universal level? And again, we may have a debate that there won't be a single one or there won't be a leading one, but let's have that debate. And we would like to know the different views, both from the industry perspective or from the service provider perspective. Thirdly is what are going to be the product and service innovation that will make this broadband promise come to life sooner rather than later? Because as discussed yesterday, we're talking about three things at the same time. We're talking about the superhighway, the mean to travel on the highway and ultimately the destination. So I would like to invite the panelists to talk a bit about the different destinations, what will make broadband truly an important experience. As Chef puts it this morning, it will become pretty much like everything else we have, like power. But we use power to do something. What is going to be that something? And last but not least, and most importantly, what is going to be the government role in this? Should the government be in a role of funding? Should the government be in a role of deploying infrastructure? Or should the government be in a role of operating? So taking the three extremes, funding, deploying, operating, or just limit the government role and the regulator role within a sort of a policy definition and enablement, but do not move the government in any sort of role in the kitchen, if I may refer to it this way. And if not, who should take the lead? So if the government is not going to play a prominent role and we all agree that there has to be a national broadband network, this 21st century digital network, then I would like to hear from my panelists, colleagues who will be taking the driving seat in this process. So on this note, I'm going to pause and Mark, why don't we start with you? Thanks. Broad range of questions. You asked me to limit responses to I think about three minutes to get us started. Let me just pick out a few points and I'm sure we'll get into that. I think what you said around the broadband technology is an important one. I think we spend a lot about hearing this morning about fiber investments and things like that. I think if we look at a company like Qtel, Qtel International, one thing just to emphasize that about 75% of our revenue actually comes outside of Qatar. And a key element we're focusing on a corporate strategy is actually providing broadband in a number of emerging markets, both in the Middle East, Northern Africa region, but also in Asia. If we look at that particular dimension, what we're seeing is that we need to take a very sensible look at where we're putting our investments and there are a number of technologies we can use. Obviously we heard about fiber. In many cases actually upgrading or using legacy copper infrastructure, upgrading that to ADSL to VDSL actually allows for a great opportunity to provide broadband services more quickly and with a more manageable investment as well. And what we see in many emerging markets is that actually that infrastructure might not even exist. So we need to find ways of either indeed putting in completely new infrastructure. And what we're actually doing in many emerging markets is using YMAX technology. We're one of the largest, if not the largest emerging market investor in YMAX in countries such as Jordan, Philippines and Pakistan, which is not a great way of offering it. Now, a fourth element is providing a 3G, HSDPA kind of mobile technology as an alternative to fixed line. Now those things are helpful, but I think we all recognize in the end as data starts to grow, we need to have kind of real broadband networks that deliver that on an ongoing basis. Now, the trick we need to recognize though, it's not just about providing the infrastructure and it comes back to your question about what other kind of activities are required there. We look at a country such as Qatar and it's actually quite specific to some other markets in the region as well. You just need to understand where's all of this traffic, all of this broadband consumption going to. Now, Qatar is quite and many Gulf States are quite specific in that region. If you look at markets such as Japan, 90% of traffic is actually domestic in the sense it's using domestic content just 10% is international. Many European markets about 50% national, about 50% international. If we look at a market such as Qatar, it's actually completely the reverse. 90% is international, just 10% is national or regional. That has a big impact on how countries such as Qatar and other countries in the Gulf look at developing their broadband strategy. A key bottleneck there is not only what you provide for the last mile, but what you provide in the back home. And that's one area where we seek a real need for investment as well. And Q2 as a group is investing heavily. I know Qatar in various forms, Qatar Foundation, knowledge ventures is investing in the back home activities as well. That's a key enabler I think we need to think about as well. On the service innovation side, we also need to recognize again, it's not just, it's not build and they'll come. It's not if you put in a fiber, 100 megabits or a one gigabits that all of a sudden all of these servers will be there. I think we just need to recognize also that stimulation on the demand side is very important. If we look at many of the Gulf, Northern African regions, some of the basic things like e-commerce are actually a bit behind what we see elsewhere in the world. Simply providing high speed internet is not gonna change it, so there are other things that we need to do. Kind of driving that to what is the role in the government in this? I think this is kind of one point. The government can really help and regulators can really help in also addressing those particular points. How do you stimulate the demand? How do you help with things like kind of backhaul? But also how do you look at other things? I mean, what's interesting is great, there are ways of looking at helping support and stimulate fiber investments. The other thing we need to think about as well, well, what is actually in that last mile? And what I find very interesting to hear about our colleague from Hong Kong is about kind of how they help put quality standards for buildings in building wiring, which is quite important. And I think we're seeing a couple of examples here in the region where by having, not having that managed well, you end up having fiber to the building, but then actually having quite a big bottleneck in the building itself. If we look at the overall investment in broadband networks, I think we need to kind of address the thing of, what is there something like Marketville? If you look at a company like Q-Tel, we're definitely investing heavily. We'll invest a lot more in driving next generation investments, taking a leadership role there. As a regulator across markets, I think you need to ask yourself the question, what is indeed the best way? Do we need to drive this? Is it not gonna happen unless we drive this? Should we play a facilitating role? Kind of acknowledging that actually, if you look at markets on average, covering the large 30% of your population actually triples the investment required. Knowing that thing, maybe it's about the subsidizing those kind of things, not necessarily finding ways to move into the areas that the market can manage itself. So subsidizing there might be another area to focus on. And I think, kind of lastly, I think one of the key things that I think, and every regulator would probably acknowledge that, which is really important, you need to be clear for any investment to take place. An investor needs to have at least some degree of certainty about what that investment will do. That they don't find themselves a year down the line seeing the complete regulatory regime change. So clarity about what your regulatory position is is quite important. But let me just leave that down, probably over a gun of three minutes. No, that's perfect. That's exactly what we want. Cover a lot of questions, we'll surface from this. Thank you, Mark. Virginia Arnascio. I will speak on my personal perspective. First of all, I think the government role is, first of all, is to facilitate and create the demand. What it means, it means that they should be service, government service to start with in order to create the demand in the market. Now, to focus on infrastructure without focusing in creating demand, it will be just a wastage of throwing investment into the infrastructure, even if it is coming by subsidies or fully financed by government. So what it means, it means that there should be applications, there should be content where it will absorb the capacity what we are looking at. Second, on the infrastructure, the solutions, it will depend on each country differently. For example, I'm giving an example on Oman. Oman, if you just look at the core business, the core, which means the backbone, that's not a big problem because both the operators, two operators, the existing one has invested heavily on the core and the new operator is going to, he has been, has committed to invest heavily where we are going to have two parallel core network operating at the same time. And the reason, because at home, we had a phase, Guno, you know the, and we suffered from this, that one of, that network which is existing, it went off the air, cut off very badly, it affected all other operators. So we needed to have another one parallel to that, how they will work together that we will see in the next phase once this is implemented. Second, the problem at home is the access networks. The access networks, yes, we have seen, mobile has taken over from fixed. The ADSL, for example, it's not uptaking at all. It seems that mobile broadband is taking over, but it is limited. If you look on a long term, it's limited. So then we have, in the major city or the capital, we have other projects which are going on, on the infrastructure, where like we have a project on wastewater water treatment, which is for the whole city of Muscat, will be connected. Now this is an opportunity for this company to lay the fiber because the incremental cost for the total project is minimal. So it cannot be, it's an opportunity that cannot be repeated. Again, how this network and who will operate it and how it will be regulated. This is, we did not address, we are looking into it. But this is again, it's a long term. It will not be ready except by 2019. Now we have a problem of ADSL. Should we unbundle it or not? Because in the capital area, the new network will be ready by that time. We have auctioned the spectrum for the broadband and we are going to auction more in this year. So all these, all these, what I can say are tools, but is the demand, creation of the demand is important. It is not just to be ready with a network when you do not have applications for it. Thank you. Thank you, Reginald Nassio. Jeremy. Thank you, Karam. I would just like to pick up, it's interesting how the thread of our speakers kind of gets connected and I promise you it's not rehearsed. But I believe that we should start thinking, you know, if we imagine ourselves five years into the future, what kind of applications will our consumers really enjoy? And I'd like to make a prediction about a killer application. And it's based on three things. Context and technology and a particular tipping technology which has actually been around for 700 years, which we only just see coming out in our phones today, 700 years, if you can imagine, what is the technology that has existed in the world for 700 years and why might that make a difference? And then finally I'd like to talk a little bit about values and how the values of our consumers are shifting. So when I joined Ericsson about 13 and a half years ago, we always had this idea that one day in the future, 2010, something like such a long way away, we thought it would be a long time ago, back in those days, we'd be able to walk past a hamburger joint and your phone would go off, would you like? A cheap hamburger. Of course this application never, ever happened because in order for that notification to be useful, you actually need three pieces of information. Yeah, I know where you are, but are you hungry and have you got any money? Because if you're starving and broke and someone sends you a picture of a nice big hamburger, you're not really going to be very happy, are you? The information hasn't been delivered in the context of what you're interested in. And I think the first measure that we should think of of these personalized services, these new revenue streams, all the new kind of stuff which is going to come, we need to make sure it's within the context of the day of the person, otherwise they're not going to use it. And you can test this against things like I make a telephone call to my friends or I rush home and I access the internet. And I think that all of these things meet a context of what the person wants. But what tipping technology will help deliver that context to someone now wherever they are? Well, of course we need broadband, we need it to be mobile. It needs to be ubiquitous. This term ubiquitous comes from the Latin word uberque, which means everywhere. So whichever technology we choose, no matter where our consumers go, it should work just the same. Secondly, most of our devices actually have cameras on them and very nice screens now and I don't think that's ever going to go away. Positioning technology is starting to become available on most phones. And in fact, even only this year you will see that positioning inside buildings not reliant on satellite will start to become significant and watch out Barcelona for something that will get out, not from Ericsson, I have to say. But it will make a big difference. But the tipping point that I'd like to bring up is actually the compass. For me, the compass will be the one piece of technology which suddenly binds all of the other ones together because it's not only that I know where you are, it's I know which direction you're looking at. What are you looking at? What's in front of you? If you imagine being able to filter out 355 degrees of information that is not relevant, suddenly it starts to become very interesting what you can do with your devices. And we already see this is a place like Japan and any of you who are lucky enough to have an iPhone 3GS, any iPhone 3GS owners will have some lucky people here. You have a compass in your phone already today. So what can you do with this to help create the context? Well, in places like Japan, what they see is as you hold your device up and you look around they start to overlay virtual information into the viewing screen of what you can see around you. Now, for example, if I'm hungry, I might have a short code to press feed me. And now as I start looking through the viewfinder, all of the McDonald's stores and Burger King stores and restaurants and Starbucks, they start to look like little icons that I can see in the distance because I know it knows where I am. It knows the direction I'm looking at and I've created the context by saying I'm hungry or maybe I'm shopping or I'm looking for presents, whatever it might be. But the point is, is that I've created that context. Now the interesting thing is from an end user point of view, we kind of think as we're looking at this new world and this term is called augmented reality, using the virtual world to enhance the real world. If you think about it, when I look through, I see these blinking icons of Burger King and for me it feels like they're just kind of blinking there, but what's technically happening is that I created the context and I forced them to blink at me because I'm hungry. Send me this information, broadcast your data to me. I'm the one that created it. And what that means is, is that from an operator point of view or whomever provides that service, they can then go to the Burger Kings or the McDonald's and say, hey, guess what, 85% of the people who are hungry found you when they were standing over here. One of the big things that Google earns a lot of its money from is by providing the context and the insights to the end users who surf the stuff on the internet. This is what they do. Unfortunately though, technology's not really enough and I think values is the last point I'd like to discover. And Karamori mentioned the idea of digital natives and for those of you who weren't here yesterday and inside Ericsson we think of anyone born after 1980 as being a digital native. For them it's very natural that you find things on the internet, every phone has a camera and for us old people, we think of ourselves as digital immigrants. We kind of came to this world. Actually the world kind of came to us and in fact it's our fault in this room, we're the ones that did it. So we're the lucky ones because can you imagine how confusing it must be outside the door of all of those people who see their children starting to embrace their technologies. And you know the interesting thing about values is there's been a dramatic shift and I'd like to summarize this up by convenience versus privacy. And there was a book written many years ago called 1984, all of you oldies will have heard of it, George Orwell, all your youngies would never have heard of such a book anyway. They had this thought police that would read your mind and everyone thought man that would be terrible, terrible future. So we don't need that. We already have that today, we have Facebook, we have Twitter, we have MySpace, people run home and go and update their information, they broadcast the world, it adds value to them. And I think that one of the interesting things for us to consider when we're thinking about policy and plans is that the values of this digital natives is shifting so dramatically. It already happened a little while ago when you saw the difference between call a line ID versus non-call a line ID. You know when I ring you and you used to pick up the phone and I'd say hello, hello, who's this? It's William, hi William, how you doing? I'm good. Now, maybe I'm ringing William and he says, Jeremy, I call you in five. And he hangs up on me. I'm not offended. I'm happy to give away my privacy for the convenience that we had an interaction. And I think that a question I'd like to throw into the middle of the room for a bit of arm wrestling is the idea that if these digital natives born around 1980, if they're now in their 30s and they're starting to become a dominating factor in our worlds, if we look in Saudi Arabia, we're looking Qatar, the Middle East, there is a huge number of young people who have dramatically different values from all of us. How do we make sure we embrace enough of what is interesting and useful for them as we create our policies so that when we choose our technologies and so on, we choose in the right context related to them? So context I think is key. Delivering context by combining these technologies like the compass and broadband and imaging and so on augmented reality. And then finally values, identifying and embracing those values and recognizing that maybe what we've brought into this room today, maybe some of those things we need to leave out the door and embrace some new ideas. Excellent. We'll go back to the discussion of innovation. Hamad? As-Salaam-Alaikum. I was born in 77, so I don't know what you think of me, which where do I belong to? So we have seen how the telecom companies have really transferred from being a traditional fix operator prior to the mobile. And at that time, there wasn't much of a business case for this company. They were really surviving on the international calls. Then the mobile with the voice and voice used to worth really money. And there was a data which is only the SMS data and we have to differentiate between the data of the mobile regular network and the internet data or internet enabled data which we see in today. So there was a big business case for mobile operators. That's when they really went into privatization. I went into these big IPOs and these big licensing fees. Now I don't think 10 years from today that we're gonna see huge value for any license of a mobile operator internationally. The reason is even when we decided to invest in a submarine cable, we can see that the money is not necessarily is coming only from the operators. It's the content providers who are really bringing the money. Google, Microsoft, or we can call Microsoft Net and Google and Yahoo and Facebook are the most watched sites in the MENA region. I'm not probably international, I don't know where they're on. But if we look all over the globe, you'd see that Google and Yahoo and Microsoft now they're competing to come to each region where they really localized their traffic. So once they localized their traffic, we come to the model which Dr. Hassam mentioned today about the YouTube, sorry, the BlackBerry where they would like to get some of the piece of the cake of the money. We see today Google being engaged with HTC and nobody knows exactly what's their intention behind or what's the business model that they're gonna drive. But it's the big company which really embraced the internet around a business case is the company who's gonna survive in the future. I don't think that there would be a strong business case for operators and that's why they are reluctant to do it. However, if we look at it from a government perspective in which prior to the 1990s, they were really welcoming, subsidizing the telecom. And it was basically part of the basic infrastructure. So whenever you build a house, you'll be guaranteed to have your telephone connected as well as electricity and water. I think the government forget their role about it. And they have to go back to it. The reason is because government care about the well-being of the people and the national competitiveness which is shaped by the internet-enabled data in the next few years. When we talk about the broadband specific, broadband, we have the economical values and the social values or the targets of the broadband. Here in the Gulf, unfortunately, I think government have to step up not only from the telecom or ICT domain. It's a domain that touched the overall government competitiveness from an economical point of view about the objectives of the broadband. The infrastructure really doesn't support the full cycle of the ecosystem of the East Airbus. So for any economical exercise, we'll have to have the full infrastructure being embraced. And again, this is why you see Google signing something with the Saudi Postal company just last month in which the Postal system in Riyadh is really supporting a full cycle of an E-Ecosystem and E-Services. And they are chasing the Saudi Postal company for them to understand how they can be the preferred supplier for e-commerce into that region. If we take Qatar as an example, the Postal services doesn't really is not part of the home delivery system. Also, when we talk about the ports or the custom authorities, they're not really supporting the E-Services game here and beside the railroads and others. When government really care about railroads, they have to care about what they're gonna do in this particular issue. If we look at Malaysia today and 7% of their GDP is really dominant by 7% is related to the e-commerce activities in Singapore. We need to calculate how much of e-commerce contributing to the GDP here in Doha. In China, it used to be 3% and now it's moving to 5% in the last only within two years. So, and from the social perspective, if we take the media as an example, we see how two sides like Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, they have really attacked the traditional newspaper Big Time where people really now go into the immediate rich content on the internet instead of going to the local newspapers. And this is only affecting all across the border. So, the question for me is, does government have to step up? Yes. They have to be engaged now to look at it not only from a telco perspective, they have to look at it from their national perspective. And I don't think that role should be only the role of the ICT regulators or enablers. It has to be really coming from the heads of the states to decide. When we see Obama in 2009 and he's really crushed on the stimulus plan to decide what he's gonna spend on and he's spent around 700 billion euros. You see that they really understand the value and how this gonna be part of their competitiveness advantage on the next few years. Excellent. Thank you.