1. Workshop: Receiver performance of mobile telephones Needs to be addressed Per Christensen Head of Division Danish Business Authority 10 April 2014

2. Agenda  Main Findings in ”Mobile Phone Antenna Performance 2013” Report  Implications of Findings  User Needs

3. Main Findings in ”Mobile Phone Antenna Performance 2013”  Sensitivity varies significantly between phone models  More than 10 times (10 dB) variation from top to bottom performer in test  Some of the most popular smartphone's are in the bottom  Largest difference in sensitivity is found in the 900 MHz band - and 900 MHz band is still the most important band for coverage.

4. Implications of 10 dB sensitivity variation  Very significant coverage variation  Shown by calculations for outdoor coverage in Denmark (next slide) for a good and a poor mobile phone  Choosing the right mobile phone may make the difference between being able or not being able to make a phone call.

5. Coverage Maps Good phone Poor phone Coverage % vs. Postal code areas Coverage % vs. Postal code areas

6. User needs: Why is Marking important?  Coverage is phone dependent  Danish mobile coverage Survey 2013 - difference in coverage variations for postal code areas, 99% coverage:  Good phone: 497 areas covered  Poor phone: 233 areas covered (Total number of post code areas in Denmark: 586)

7. User needs: Why is Marking important? (2)  No sensitivity figures for mobile phone available to users  Sensitivity information is important, in particular:  at the edge of coverage – which is found everywhere both outdoor and indoor, even in metropolitan areas.

8. User needs: Why is Marking important?(3)  Coverage is important in order to meet the targets in the Digital Agenda  Ensure efficient use of the scarce spectrum resource.

9. High on the political agenda in Northern Europe  May 2013: Letter from 8 Nordic and Baltic NRAs to the EU-Commission urging the Commission to take the necessary steps to create an EU-labelling scheme  December 2013: Letter from Danish, Swedish and Finnish minister to Vice- President Tajani to re-iterate the request for an EU labelling scheme.

10. Conclusions  Coverage is very dependent on phone sensitivity  Danish coverage survey clearly shows the difference  No way of getting information for sensitivity  Users are left in the dark.

11. Conclusions (2)  Marking for sensitivity is essential:  Enable customers having an informed choice of phone performance before buying  Increase customer perceived coverage where coverage is weak  Reach the targets in the Digital Agenda  Ensure efficient use of the scarce spectrum resources.

12. Conclusions (3)  The Commission is called upon to take the necessary steps in order to create an EU labelling scheme for receiver performance in mobile phones:  with the aim to create transparency for consumers, and  to reach the ambitious targets set out in the Digital Agenda and the RSPP.