As I've said already, the model is different. The infrastructure is owned by so-called infrastructure managers. They are state-owned—these are public institutions—and they are subsidized. All the operators are so-called commercial operators, so they don't get subsidies for operations.
We have very few pure private players in Europe, like NTV in Italy, and they are very successful from a commercial perspective as well as from an operational perspective, which means performance and customer success. All other major operators in Europe are state-owned, but they are competing. They are Italian-owned or French-owned, or whatever, but they are competing and they are successful from this perspective.
If you are looking into public-private partnership models for the infrastructure, as you have, it's always important to know.... I really like it in the English language, because you decide between financing and funding.
Even if you have PPP models, you need funding from a public budget. If you procure PPP, you will not do it because you will get money from the private sector. They may give you money up front, but in the end, if you want to go for a PPP, you will do that because you will want to buy the capabilities. If you don't have the capabilities in your country, then a PPP could be a good solution. If it's about organizing funding, it's still a matter for a public budget because, in the end, private operators may be more efficient, but we are not able to operate the infrastructure commercially.