The telecoms industry doesn’t need 6G — it needs a rethink

Paul Budde writes that 6G’s status is more akin to habit than progress, as traffic growth slows, revenues remain flat and capital flows elsewhere.

For more than a decade, the global telecommunications industry has relied on a familiar narrative: Each new generation of mobile technology will unlock new revenue streams, justify massive capital expenditures and restore growth.

This story is now wearing thin. As I have stated many times, revenue growth in the industry has remained stable, 5G could not be delivered the transformative rise promised by its proponents, and the looming debate about the risk that 6G will become an exercise in technological momentum rather than economic necessity.

The inconvenient truth is that most consumers are perfectly happy with 4G. Performance differences between 4G and 5G in everyday applications (messaging, video streaming, navigation, social media) are marginal at best.

Many users did not even realize that their devices were switching to 5G. While there have been legitimate efficiency gains in networks and some niche applications where lower latency and higher capacity are important, these have not translated into broad-based revenue growth for operators.

This raises an inevitable question: Was the investment in 5G really worthwhile?

5G: Efficiency without making money

From an engineering perspective, 5G has brought improvements. Spectrum efficiency is higher, networks are more flexible, and operators can manage traffic more intelligently. But efficiency gains do not automatically translate into higher incomes. In many cases, they reduce the cost per bit in a market where prices are already under intense competitive pressure.

Long-promised corporate and industrial use cases (smart factories, autonomous vehicles, remote surgery) remain limited in scale. Private networks and fixed fiber connections often provide more reliable and cost-effective solutions for these environments. As a result, the business impact of 5G has been incremental rather than transformational.

Meanwhile, fixed broadband networks are nearing virtual completion in most developed markets. Fiber to the premises has reached a point where additional investments provide diminishing returns. Capacity constraints are no longer a pressing issue for most users, and these networks are likely to meet demand for decades to come.

Decreasing traffic growth changes the equation

One of the strongest justifications for generation upgrades has always been increased traffic. This logic is now breaking down. mobile data growth reached its peak a few years ago and it is decreasing. Even the rapid rise of artificial intelligence applications has not been able to reverse this trend in public mobile networks. Outside of data center interconnection, traffic growth no longer forces operators into urgent capacity expansions.

This fundamentally challenges the assumption that a new mobile generation is required every decade. If traffic growth is moderate, coverage is largely complete, and customers are unwilling to pay more, the economic logic of 6G becomes deeply questionable.

Capital flows elsewhere, not to telecommunications

At the same time, global investments in digital infrastructure are accelerating, but telecommunications operators are reducing the share of this investment. Capital is flowing into hyperscalers, cloud platforms, and AI-driven data centers. These investments dwarfing traditional telecommunications capex and reshaping the digital value chain.

Telecommunications operators increasingly find themselves reduced to the role of connectivity providers for infrastructure owned and controlled by others. Even when they invest in AI-enabled data centers or edge facilities, their spending remains modest compared to that of hyperscalers. The center of gravity has shifted decisively from networks to computing, software and data.

This change is not just financial; It is strategic. Control over platforms, applications, and AI models provides pricing power and influence. Connectivity, on the contrary, has become commoditized.

Localized opportunity, structural decline

There are areas where the telecommunications industry can still play a meaningful role. High-density environments such as stadiums, campuses, ports, and industrial sites may require localized, high-performance wireless connectivity. These access points can support custom services and partnerships with enterprises and cloud providers.

But these opportunities are selective and local. These do not justify the national rollout of ever more expensive mobile technologies everywhere. The future points to targeted investment, improved demand forecasting and selective partnerships, not generational upgrades.

Is 6G the solution to the problem?

In this context, 6G risks falling victim to structural industry decline rather than being a catalyst for renewal. Without a compelling, mass-market use case or reliable revenue model, 6G may have difficulty attracting investor support. Governments may fund research programs and standards bodies may make progress, but operators will increasingly ask a difficult question: Who will pay for it?

If the answer is “nobody,” 6G may be limited to laboratories, pilot projects and marketing presentations.

A crossroads for the telecommunications industry

The telecommunications industry is approaching a strategic crossroads. One path leads to continued heavy investment in infrastructure with diminishing returns, justified by technological tradition rather than economic reality. The other requires a fundamental rethinking of the sector’s role; a shift from owning ubiquitous networks to monetizing specific assets, services, and partnerships.

The rise of artificial intelligence has not reinvigorated the telecommunications industry; exposed their marginal position in the modern digital economy. Unless operators face this reality, 6G will not save the industry. Instead, it can highlight how far the center of value creation has moved away from traditional telecommunications.

In this sense, the most important question is no longer when 6G will arrive, but whether the telecommunications industry still has a clear reason to build it.

Paul Budde IA is a columnist and managing director of independent telecommunications research and consultancy. Paul Budde Consulting. You can follow Paul on Twitter @PaulBudde.

Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.