 So I'm very honored to have today on the panel with us, Cristiano Amon, who's president of Qualcomm. Peter Tervish, who's president of industrial automation and member of the group executive committee at ABB. And soon we'll have Rima Qashy, executive as president and chief strategy officer of Verizon who will join us in a few minutes. So we're here today to talk about 5G. So far, and Cristiano, I think this seems to be changing quite frequently. I think we have about more than 50 commercial 5G networks that have launched so far in 27 countries and over 300 mobile operators that have announced that they are going to make investments in over 100 countries. There's also studies. I think you've updated a study recently with IHS that 5G will enable over 13.2 trillion US dollars in the global economic output by 2025. And of course, you've heard a lot about 5G. You know, it's going to connect everything and everyone everywhere. And it has the power to be absolutely transformational to our lives and to industry. However, behind all these wonderful opportunities, we hear a lot of concerns as well and some challenges that still need to be overcome. And they are from multiple angles. Once the user's perspective, you know, there is, there seem to be at least a public understanding that is not there yet of what 5G will bring to the consumers. People don't really know what to expect, what it will deliver to them. There are, of course, political and policy concerns. I mean, you know, it would have been hard to not hear about all the tensions we've been going through over the last 12 months, maybe even a little bit more, around security, around trust, but also around policy. You know, do we have the right policy framework in place to make a successful and sustainable deployment of 5G globally? There are concerns about climate change. Is it going to be good or bad? Are there misconceptions? And maybe even, you know, impact on health. And finally, the financial challenges. You know, is the traditional business model, the traditional investment model that we've had for 3G, for 4G, going to be viable for the 5G world? Finally, at the intersection of all these things, there is also a fundamental question that, you know, I'm sure you've been coming across when you speak to governments around the world. We certainly have, which is, you know, whether 5G could potentially create a two-speed digital world. And this is really a concern for some of the governments. So, Cristiano, we mentioned, I'll start with you on this digital possible two-speed world. You know, this 13.2 trillion US dollars of economic output, who is this going to benefit exactly? And, you know, when we speak of this potential divide of two worlds, I think the concern is not, you know, the traditional economy, emerging economies versus developed world, but it's also urban versus rural. You know, we hear a lot about smart cities, but we never hear about smart villages or smart countryside so far. So the question to me is really, for you, is really, who's going to benefit? Are we, is it a myth that we may have this digital divide fervent? And what is the policy, the role of government in ensuring that we are going to have, you know, basically a sustainable environment? Very good. Happy to be here. I think there's a lot in there. So maybe I'll start talking about who's going to benefit. You know, what is interesting about 5G right now, it's no longer a unique technology to the wireless sector. It's also how you should think about the future of the Internet. I think it's been already decided. The last mile of the Internet is wireless. And 5G, because, actually, it's simply to describe it, it connects everything to the cloud in a reliable manner. It's going to have such a transformation aspect in the continual, you know, digitalization of the economy and it's going to influence the transportation manufacturing smart cities. And that's where the economic output is going to come from. And it's going to be an essential technology for the digital transformation of all of those industries. And fortunately, I would say fortunately, as we experience with 4G that the countries that took a leadership position was able to create digital economies and new companies and business models in a more advanced and competitive way than the countries that did not. What we see today is all developing economies are really focused and make sure they're not behind. The 5G is deploying across all continents at the same time. That's why you saw those large number of operators. And I think the economic growth coming from 5G is going to be associated with all of those industries that will be touched by 5G. Now, go ahead. I just want to answer your other question. You had another question about whether we're going to live into a split in a world. And I don't think that's correct. And I'll say the reason I think those concerns are probably it's misunderstanding of where we start with 5G. We live in a connected world. I think that has been true. And I think we've been more and more connected. And 5G is really a true global standard, which has been deployed in all geographies from the United States to China, Japan, Korea, Europe, and many of the other economies also indicated they're going to be deploying 5G. And I think one of the great things about the wireless industry really reduced the distances. I think people are more connected from what you see happening to social media to how the companies get connected, how in general we're driving towards a connected society. And specifically to your question about if you look in communities such as urban and rural, I would argue that for the first time, now operators can have one single network to support both. As we move towards a converged network deployment, and also you started to see use cases on 5G for broadband, you actually have the ability to build on this concept that the last mile data is going to be wireless and actually finally deliver on the promise of a fixed wireless broadband that 5G will be the first generation to be able to deliver. But how is that going to translate for people who live in Africa, who live in least developed countries in Asia, in Southeast Asia? I mean, we hear a lot about industry use cases, about enterprises, do you think we are at the same stage that we were when we had 3G? Were the governments as concerned about 3G creating this digital divide that they are about 5G? Or is it because 3G in a way has broadened the divide in the sense between North and South? No, I think we're in a much better position. You know, I think we've been fortunate enough as our company to be part of every single wireless transition. And I think there is no question that what the mobile industry have done to bridge the digital divide has not been accomplished by any other industry. I think 3G phones and then later 4G phones have been first time that many countries, especially emerging markets, were able to have connection to the internet and be able to start to participate in the digital economy. Or argue that the scale of mobile is so incredible that the smartphone that you see today, it is actually mankind's largest development platform. And what I hear today, especially as you get into this dialogue about 5G and people say, where is it? Is it, can I get it? Will I get it? It's very different than what we saw before in 3G or 4G when people said there's really no use for this technology. So here about 5G is, why can I now get it faster? And the scale of mobile is so big, especially as this technology go to other industries, that I actually think emerging markets will have access to cost-effective technology faster that that was made possible on 3G and 4G. And if anything, 3G and 4G is proof point that the mobile technology can reach everyone. But who's going to put the investment in where maybe there won't be the return on investment? And then I want to also bring that question to Peter. So there are two fronts. So one concern is, or one question, is there enough demand? Will there be enough demand? Again, I go back to markets that are less developed in terms of investment from the operator side. The more if you are a mobile operator, are you ready to deploy 5G in some of the markets where 4G has not yet given you a return on your investment and probably not even on 3G? That's one question. The other question is, as we move on to 5G, IoT, industrial IoT, of course the verticals are going to play, vertical industries are going to play an increasing role and we need more cooperation. Is there enough incentive for, for instance, ABB or your competitors in other industries to invest in 5G? And what does that investment look like? At what sort of state of the value chain do you start investing? So maybe Peter and then I'll come back to you, Christian. Yeah, if I start on the industrial side, clearly technology, business models, and regulatory development have to go hand in hand rather than kind of one as an afterthought to each other because they have a mutual influence on each other. What we're currently doing and where we're currently investing is on the research and development in partnerships actually here at the forum. When you're in the Congress Hall, you can look at a partnership result that between Ericsson, Swisscom, and ourselves, we've basically used 5G technology and it's low latency, high bandwidth in a nice demonstrator that you can personally get your hand on and actually feel what it means and think about how would that have been with previous generations of technology. So I think that dimension is something I can really only encourage you to go look at. Of course, R&D collaborations are not mainly aimed at producing demonstrators, but they're rather aimed at for specific industry verticals and industrial applications that we see as particularly promising, be it that they involve mobile assets where you actually need the reliable connection, even though the assets are moving around, I think mining, both open cost and an underground, or be it that the low latency application enables you to basically work with humans, including haptic feedback and more generally to take automation from where it is today. So it's moved from isolated to connected with the previous generations of technology, but the collaborative, which is about not only connecting people with each other, but letting people and systems, people and algorithms achieve more together as part of the digital transformation, that's something where we see 5G technology as a key ingredient. So for now, we're not deploying capital in putting down infrastructure and see what happens. We're investing in research and development of our own, with industry partners, some of them end customers, some of them equipment makers, and we see that for where we are in the transition as the right point to invest, and then over time, as the business models and regulations evolve, then we see who invests in what other part. Chris? Very good, so I want to address your question about the ability to make investments in 5G in the operator, I think, of viability, especially as you look at developing economies. Before I do that, I just want to say it's actually refreshing to hear, Peter, it's one of those things that we've been saying since the very beginning. In any other generation of war, as you didn't have ownership of the technology by many other industry, that's a great example of how transformative 5G is, that we're not only talking about phones, I really like that. Let me address your question because it is an important issue. The operator market has, you know, it ranges depending on the country from highly regulated to less regulated, and it's a consequence of how the telecommunications have been. If you remove yourself from the unique situation of a single operator, I think there is now a broader understanding within governments, and especially the leading economies, that no country will benefit from being late to 5G or not having a 5G infrastructure. You can really argue that that is going to be in the best interest of the competitiveness of the industries in the economy as well as the evolution of the world as internet. And the network operators agree with you on that. I think all the network operators agree with that. Now, the question that you have is, 5G is in the category of essential infrastructures, no different than railroads and roads in the past and electricity, and it's going to be how the internet's going to work and not only unique for phones, but for the rest of the industry. So I think what you're going to see is an evolution of the models. In some cases, you see operators will be operating with different rules. You see a lot of more merger between operators so that they can actually be able to make investments. You see some other markets where you actually started to see, even in China, you saw that the operators are jointly investing in infrastructure in a shared network approach, and you're going to see operators diversifying themselves, changing the business model as they more and more get into the content business or provide different type of services, including supporting the development of private networks. That's part of the 5G transformation. So, and I feel that it's important to bring the attention for policy makers about the importance to really look into the need to build the 5G infrastructure and in that process to reassess the regulatory environment for the operators in order to enable the operators to invest. And then there's a unique thing, and I just want to maybe it's a little bit of a detail, but a very important detail. And if anything, it's a unique situation to regions like Europe and the United States. Every new rollout of technology, especially a technology that's 5G that requires the densification of the networks, it will need more sites. And one of the biggest issue that you have in Europe and the United States and many other developed economies is the ability to get permits. Operators are not well prepared to independently deal with municipality by municipality to get permit for sites. And that's another important role of the public sector to support the deployment of 5G. And if I can add to that, I mean, without going too far into the details of that one important question, the policymaking that we see being discussed differently also in different parts of the world is the question whether it should all be the mobile network operators of today basically operating those networks or if you actually have a large industrial complex, say a large chemical plant, a large mine, whatever other large operations, whether you should be allowed to also as 5G be your own network operator, whether you really need to buy that spectrum or whether like today, you can basically operate your communications. And that, of course, has an impact on business models, has an impact on adoption, where and when. So there's a lot to be shaped, but I think the opportunity is to be shaped. And I think that's the important thing that we don't stand back and say, well, many questions still, but there are things we can do today. There are things we can prepare for immediately tomorrow. And then there's some further questions that for the further rollout will be essential. So we were, I was mentioning at the beginning as well about security and trust. And if you look at studies, there's a prediction that there's more than 41 billion of devices that will be connected by IoT that will generate zettabytes of data to the amount that we've never seen before. So there are great concerns as well, that's whether the 5G networks, but not just the networks, the devices, the machines, if you really think end-to-end, how are we going to ensure security and resilience and build really a system, an ecosystem that is end-to-end resilient and secure? You would argue, we've heard from industry that would argue that on the contrary, 5G will make the whole ecosystem more secure and governments and the public on the other hand have more concerns. So I'll open it to any of you, you know, that's, what are your views on that? Yeah, if I look at it from where we stand today, my personal perception is that with the security that comes built in with 5G, we will actually, with the new technology, have an opportunity to have more secure systems. When I say more secure, I don't think secure is ever an absolute, there's always going to be trade-offs between the security, the usability, and the cost of any solution. But if you look in terms of replacing existing solutions that date back to a time when nobody took security considerations that serious, so maybe 30-year-old systems, if I can make that point, then you will easily find more security flaws and more open doors in those kind of technologies. Clearly, technology will evolve both on the security solutions as well as on the security threat landscape. So this won't be solving all problems for all times, but I think it is a progress that will be helpful, that will make it simpler for people to deploy solutions, including their security aspect. So while I'm not an eternal optimist as a realist, 5G will help us on security. Maybe if I can answer the question, what I'd like to do briefly, I think there are two topics, and I think you have to divide this in two conversations. One is going back to what we said at the beginning of this panel. Because 5G now touches many other industries, different industries have different security requirements. What you do, for example, in terms of department transportation and automobile and traffic safety, is where you think about the energy and the power grid, they all have different security requirements which require different trust levels. The other issue is, I don't think it's a concern. I think the technology in itself creates opportunities. How private enterprises and governments, what they do with the data that is going to be generated by the technology, that's what needs to be well-regulated. How data gets acquired, use an application. The technology in itself is actually an opportunity for good. Good. I would like to open the floor to questions if any of you have questions for Peter or Cristiano. Please, if you would like to introduce yourself as well before asking a question. I'm Kenji from Nikkei. When you talk about 5G, I think the big elephant in the room should be Huawei, right? Or the Chinese. If both of you could comment on how the Huawei and the Chinese are set to be dominating the technology or are set to sort of control the equipment market in a way, would you please comment on that issue, please? Maybe I'll go first. Yes, please. Look, the way I want to go back to the comment I just made. I think this whole issue about different companies and different suppliers, I think less than a political issue. It's more about the fact that 5G now touches many other industries and different industries have completely different requirements. For example, if you think of that, 5G is going to provide the IT infrastructure for the energy sector. That gets associated with a lot of what the countries believe as part of their critical infrastructure and national security. And each country has their preferred set of vendors and trusted suppliers. I think it's a natural discussion that happened independent of any company as 5G transcend the telecommunication sector into other sectors. The other thing is 5G, there's a number of companies innovated. I think our view is what actually makes the ecosystem strong and I'll speak from Qualcomm and our business model. It's not about one company doing everything. I think we have seen to the history that when more people can innovate, technology and markets develop faster than one single company or one single country. And I think that's the beauty of the collaboration and partnership model. That's the one we follow of our company about taking a horizontal model and allow other companies to participate. And we're seeing now a very vibrant 5G ecosystem, especially in countries like Japan and Korea, United States and Europe. You see a number of companies, for example, Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung, driving infrastructure in a number of companies building devices. And I think the reality is that 5G is moving at a very fast pace and it's not about one company doing it all. Peter, would you like to... I think that was so well said that I would only say I agree. Okay, thank you. Are there any other questions in the room, please, sir? What was the densification, how do we have to understand as we see now the landscape with the towers, et cetera, if you talk about densification? What does it mean? Second part, first part, second part, you have public networks and more private networks. Will there be an overlap or how does it function? Can there be conflict between, do you have to manage both? Do they have to be linked or just the relation between public and private networks in the future? All right, maybe I'll start with that. So when I mentioned densification, when you start, when you should think, when you think about the 5G technology, and I like, it wasn't my example, actually this was first provided by T-Mobile, USA, a US operator, you need to think about the network of 5G as a three-layer cake. You have the lower frequencies, the existing frequencies that are part of the 4G technology, the existing 4G spectrum. Then you have new spectrum, which is in the higher frequency, like the 3.5 gigahertz, and then you have millimeter wave, like in the higher frequencies, 26 gigahertz in Europe, 28 and 39 gigahertz. As you go up in the spectrum, the good thing is you get much more bandwidth. You cannot deliver the industrial aspect of 5G, for example, without millimeter wave, that you get the ability to get multiple gigabits of speed or latency. But those stations, they look like Wi-Fi stations. They look like access points. And you need, they're not as big or disruptive on the landscape as a big tower, but you need many of them. And in order for that to happen, the network becomes more dense with those cell stations. And therefore the operators need to acquire new sites to build those. And that's what I meant about densification and the importance to enable that deployment. It's actually, at the end of the day, those new stations, contrary to what people think, they actually consume less power. They irradiate at a much lower power. The cell radius is smaller. The device uses less power and radiation, but you need many of those. That's the densification part. Maybe I'll start the other question on private and I'll ask Peter to talk since his company is really looking into a lot of the private. This is not new into the industry. It's just for the first time we see conversions. I'll give an example. In the telephone days, when an operator said, I'm going to build your telephone, many of the enterprises said, no, no, no, I'm gonna build my own PBX. That's my own telephone system. And then today, the enterprise has its own Wi-Fi access point. So we have the ecosystem in public-private. I think 5G is no different. The only difference is now the same technology is used by both, by the IT managers or the operation managers as the operator. And the good thing about that, for the first time, we have more than one company with the role of building the infrastructure. As the operators build in the public network, the industries are building the private networks. And that facilitates this process of densification that I mentioned before. But I don't think you're all right. Yeah, as a small addition to that, I mean, if you look at networks in industry, so private networks in the industrial case, going forward clearly, 5G doesn't mean it will be all wireless. The way to think about what 5G solutions will look like at the end of the day, they will be the right combinations of fixed line, of wireless cell network, as well as Wi-Fi, as an example, Wi-Fi 6 also. So these technologies complement each other. Each of them has their respective strengths and weaknesses and development needs. So things will get more powerful, less latency, more data, but they will not be the one thing that solves it all. It will be that you can basically create such solutions more simply going forward and that you have sort of more powerful tools in the toolbox going forward. So that's how I would see it on the industrial side. Fine, maybe just one more question quickly. We'll see. Please, go ahead. I just want to ask, I mean, Qualcomm seems to be the major victim of this sort of fight by the US government against Huawei. And what do you, I mean, do you think, I mean, the big tech company, like you could convince the White House to change the model? You think this is going to be the norm in the future? I mean, the Europeans, I mean, they are pressured by the White government of Washington to make a choice, but they don't want to upset either Washington or Beijing. So they like sort of restrict the call of, you know, elements they don't want to manpower. So what is the way forward, I think, for even for Europe? All right. Thank you for your question. Nice to see you too. So here's how we think about this. Look, at the end of the day, you know, we actually have a partner relationship with Huawei, like many other Chinese companies have been, Qualcomm has been, you know, doing a lot of business and created actually a lot of growth opportunities for both, you know, the United States for a base in China. Actually, we are very fortunate in a way because our, you know, our company has been a stabilizing force in at least in the area that we operate between the two countries. Our business model has elements of intellectual property, you know, with our licensing program, protection of intellectual property, which United States like. He has import of semiconductors, but also has growth in China on one belt, one road, as many of our Chinese customers expand outside China. So even in the middle of the trade tensions, our relationship with China actually increase, including bring some of our Chinese customers to the United States, like OPPO and OnePlus selling the United States. So I think with that, I feel that at the end of the day, eventually parties will come to agreements about how everybody can participate in 5G because it is a global market anyway.