» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
1. Msia 5G is 2 -3 years behind other market. DNB 5G during launch comparing 5G speed with other mature 5G market is clearly not equal comparison, that is why it can claim super high but now back to normal.
If comparing DNB 5G network to mature ones isn't fair, where is other new or small rollout 5G nation rank globally compared to mature ones? Does Malaysia really have high ranking because it's being "new" only?
Since it's normal now according to you, Malaysia 5G global ranking is still higher than Malaysia 4G global ranking. I acknowledge that urban 5G speed is getting a bit slower, but so is other nation. But at the same time, even the rural area can get higher speed 5G speed. I can't say the same for 4G in rural area.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
2. Uniquely for Msia, during 4G era, each telco was given 10Mhz LTE spectrum to roll out, while a large chunk given to Altel a new company and Redtone. This cronyism situation keeps happening in Malaysia telco market. So to compare a 10Mhz LTE with other countries having 20Mhz as starter speed is not a fair comparison, only until later telco manage to rent to secure to launch LTE 20Mhz. That is why speed comparison for their new network back then don’t make sense. If you want to compare for sake of comparison to justify a case you can but it is just not the right way unless there is ulterior motive. Or maybe just simply x2 the 4G speed to see how the ranking goes ….
That's understandable why Malaysia 4G in theory should be slow. But then, isn't Malaysia 5G used a total of 120Mhz of spectrum only? Why Malaysia 5G median speed can beat other country that have bigger 5G spectrum allocation that can also combine with their 4G spectrum?
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
3. Why Msia 4G coverage is lackluster i have no supporting just my sense as investor perspective: Maxis, UM, Celcom and Digi need to pay Altel and Redtone for their portion of spectrum … or else the money would be used to expand coverage. In a way the cost to roll out LTE in MY compared to other countries are bloated due to the hidden spectrum rental from Altel and Redtone. This is Msia culture unfortunately… Altel and Redtone collect rental without doing anything.
I acknowledge what Altel and Redtone done is scummy and everything MNO have to do during 4G era.
But then with DNB, all investment and services is done by DNB and all the MNO get the same coverage at the same price without any discrimination. This massively reduces MNO cost to build massive, duplicate 5G network in Malaysia. These savings can then be passed on to consumers by offering cheaper 5G plans compared to 4G plan, the data from The Edge has already proof this.
Not only that, but rural area people who used to getting scraps by these MNO because of low profitability won't get rollout 5G fast in their area and when it actually come, they have to buy expensive 5G plan if they want to enjoy 5G fully or else, they will get low quota with low speed plan. This is what happening during 4G era. While with DNB 5G, rural people get the 5G coverage fast and they can just subscribe to small MNO that offer unlimited 5G data and speed without any confusing restrictions.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
4. In regards to your article that the ROI for 5G is long, that is entirely private companies to manage and think thru, no Msians money shall be spent to worry about it … MCMC just need to allocate spectrum not get into business competitiom with telco. So i still see DNB is bad move by PN gov aka MOF Zafrul minister that disrupt the telco market causing more harm. Is good UM survived the DNB disaster and given mandate to launch a real telco 5G network.
Using Malaysian money, the MNO save cost from infrastructure duplication while the customer save money from cheaper 5G services and that's is already proven from the data itself.
And from long term point of view, the small MNO can survive by offering cheaper plan while the big MNO can offer more services that should differentiate them from smaller MNO. Isn't that how competition should work? Why in 2025 we still expect the primary difference between MNO still be just coverage? In my opinion, that's not a real competition USP for an advanced technology.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/deanbubley_p...6536465408-czQ- Why should the goverment let the corporations think about how to make things cheap when the price plan offered by MNO during 4G era is literally much more expensive than 5G plan offered currently?
Also, based on post I shared before. 6G researcher and experts said that the reason why wholesale network is hard to do in other nation is because of initial investment cost and Goverment Policy issue. With DNB, all the MNO paid the same amount of money to DNB and Malaysia policy makes wholesale 5G easy. So how would letting MNO thinks about wholesale help when it's a policy issue?
Like I said before, coverage should a basic and default for every MNO, coverage shouldn't be a USP if 5G is really an advanced technology according to these MNO. With fibre, every ISP is competing on services, not bragging about coverage like it's 2010s.
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li...646317297664%29With DNB making cheaper 5G plans possible and give equal coverage access to MNO, consumers are benefiting DNB 5G compared to the costly and unequal 4G era. This pushes MNO to differentiate through services and not just coverage. I can't help but wonder if the resistance to DNB is due to some people preferring the old ways, where coverage was the primary less challenging USP, rather than embracing innovation in services. So correct me if I'm wrong, but do you really think the current consumer benefits and the move to a wholesale model are a "bad" move?
This post has been edited by OfficiallyAhmad: May 15 2025, 01:29 AM 
May 4 2025, 03:15 PM
Quote
0.0276sec
1.06
6 queries
GZIP Disabled