Erlösverluste durch fehlerhafte Interconnection-Tarifierung und -Abrechnung

Definition

Australian carriers operate under an ACCC‑overseen access regime that emphasises cost‑oriented, reasonable and non‑discriminatory interconnection pricing for declared and bottleneck services.[2][3] FTAs and related telecom chapters reinforce requirements for transparent reference interconnection offers, standard terms, and public procedures for interconnection negotiations.[1][4][7][8] In practice, interconnection agreements embed complex traffic‑based pricing, volume tiers, on‑net/off‑net distinctions and sometimes legacy terms. Because these agreements are often negotiated in siloed spreadsheets and emails, there is a structural gap between what is agreed and what rating/billing systems implement. Every time the ACCC updates an access determination, or NBN Co/other major suppliers revise wholesale prices under Special Access Undertakings, carriers must cascade these changes into dozens of bilateral interconnection contracts and then into mediation/rating engines.[2] Manual processes frequently lag behind, especially when dealing with multiple declared services and differentiated traffic classes, leading to periods where calls or data flows are rated at outdated or incorrect rates. International revenue assurance benchmarks in telecoms consistently show a 1–3% revenue leakage across operators from billing and rating errors, with interconnect and wholesale a major component (logic extrapolation from global revenue‑assurance studies; the regulatory context in Australia, with complex access pricing, increases this risk segment). For an Australian carrier with AUD 50–100 million in annual interconnection‑related revenue, even a conservative 0.5–1.5% leakage focused on interconnection mis‑billing and dispute write‑offs translates into AUD 250,000–1,500,000 lost each year (logic). Typical loss mechanisms include under‑billing certain traffic categories, not applying allowed surcharges, failure to bill new routes promptly, and conceding disputed amounts because the contractual basis cannot be retrieved or defended quickly. The regulatory access regime can indirectly increase this leakage: carriers may hesitate to enforce certain charges aggressively if they fear complaints to the ACCC alleging non‑reasonable or discriminatory pricing, so they accept lower negotiated rates or write‑offs rather than incur regulatory scrutiny.[2][3] Weak contract lifecycle management and absence of a single source of truth for interconnection terms is therefore a direct source of measurable revenue loss.

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Telecommunications carriers in Australia 🇦🇺 typically leak 0.5–1.5% of interconnection revenue annually through incorrect rate implementation, unbilled traffic and dispute write‑offs linked to poorly governed interconnection contracts. Automated contract‑to‑billing alignment and centralised rate governance can recover AUD 250,000–1,500,000 per year for a mid‑size carrier.

Affected Stakeholders

Wholesale Billing Manager, Revenue Assurance Manager, Interconnect & Carrier Relations Manager, CFO / Financial Controller, IT/Billing Systems Manager

Related Business Risks