Monday, July 13, 2020
Week 28 in Telecoms, Media, Internet
Thursday, October 01, 2015
FTTH-related news round-up
- In the Netherlands, CIF is reaching the limits of growth, owning a range of small cable companies. Now they are looking to do rural FTTH, with partners, in a ‘line-rental’ model.
- FTTH is expanding in South Africa, of all places.
- Reggeborgh is selling a majority stake of Deutsche Glasfaser to KKR. Is that an early exit or a way to raise massive funds?
- Impressive cost savings from NG-PON2. It is being trialed by Vodafone.
- Structural separation in the UK? Vodafone appears to be the company with the strongest belief in both FTTH and Open Access. People cannot even agree on the UK’s performance in an international perspective. Of course, BT claims a top position, but others, speaking from experience, disagree strongly.
- A Hyperoptic survey points to real estate value increase from FTTP.
- Italy seems to be committed to nationwide FTTH, but remains a bit unclear on where they are.
- Google Fiber: a new unit in Alphabet and much more than a ‘hobby’. Challenged by Google, several operators are doing cross-state FTTH now: AT&T, TDS, CenturyLink and others. Comcast’s 2 Gb/s service: over FTTH and later over Docsis 3.1? It remains somewhat unclear. And the price is pretty outrageous.
- Speculation in Australia over NBN Co returning to FTTP, with Malcolm Turnbull as Prime Minister.
- Sandvine’s September 2015 edition of Global Internet Phenomena Report.
- The ITU State of Broadband 2015 report: 148 nations have an NBN plans.
- Akamai’s latest State of the Internet report.
Sunday, April 05, 2009
Singapore: 100/50 Mb/s triple play for under 40 EUR/mo

- Part of the iN2015 policy.
- FTTH PON network, in the familiar 3-layer model. Structural separation between passive and active layers, operational separation between active layer and any RSP owned by the same company (i.e. StarHub). Open access (OA) at layer 2 and 3 (slide 8).
- Passive layer to be built by OpenNet (SingTel 30%, Axia NetMedia 30%, SP Telecomms 15%, Singapore Press 25%). Subsidy SGD 750m. Residential wholesale tariff 15 SGD/line/mo, business 50 SGD/line/mo, no connection fee.
- Active layer to be built by Nucleus Connect, a separate StarHub company. Subsidy SGD 250m. Tariffs (include OpenNet fee; all in SGD/line/mo): residential 100/50 Mb/s for 21, 1.0/0.5 Gb/s for 121; business: 100/100 Mb/s for 75, 1/1 Gb/s for 860.
- Open access to retail service providers (RSP).
- Nucleus to be incorporated April 17 2009, RfP to formally close October 2009.
- Service launch April 2010.
- Coverage 60% by end of 2010, 95% by end of 2012.
- Universal service obligation from 2013.
- 2015 targets: 330k residential subs, 80k business subs.
- Pretty much fits my ideal for a FTTH network, featuring structural separation of the passive network. See what is does for ownership and bringing in third-party investors. SingTel may spin-off network assets into OpenNet. It goes even further than New Zealand (structural separation only once Telecom NZ gains a majority share) or KPN/Reggefiber (functional sepapartion 'only'). It is striking to see how functional separation in the NL is defended by referring to the competitive situation (nationwide cable coverage), which has nothing to do with it - see Singapore, where structural separation is forced because the network needs to function properly, not because there is competition from some other network.
- Too bad it's PON, not P2P (slide 24).
- The 1 Gb/s offering is neat, though.
- The residential offering is asymmetrical. We are seeing more of this, because FTTH needs to be positioned above DSL (i.e. more expensive), including business DSL.
- The 2015 targets appear to be quite modest, for a state that is home to 4.8m.
- We'll be on the lookout for RfPs to equipment manufacturers. RSPs are suggested to bring their own residential gateways (see slide 26). The NTE will allow end-users to get services from several RSPs at once (as limited by the number of ethernet ports on the NTE, I suppose).
- The 100/50 Mb/s service will be 21 SGD/mo for the RSP (just over 10 EUR/m0), the 1.0/0.5 Gb/s service will be 121 SGD/mo (60 EUR/mo) at the wholesale level for RSPs. The retail price for a triple play will add a margin plus the cost of both TV and telephony. It looks like an extended TV package is 37 SGD/mo, and telephony (line rental, unlimited local calls) is around 10 SGD/mo. The fast triple play would then be around 68 SGD/mo (EUR 33,50), the ultra-fast triple play 168 SGD/mo (EUR 83), before earning the RSP a margin. I suppose the triple play will be commercially available for under 40 EUR/mo.
- MobileOne lost this round, but has stated it will be a RSP. Sureley SingTel will be one too.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Viviane Reding: how do we get to FTTH?
I am very sympathetic to most views and proposals coming out of the EC, even if the new EU regulator (EECMA) could be a stretch (it remains to be seen how bureaucracy and harmonisation will be balanced).
Here are some quotes that I find particularly interesting, but do read the whole thing (it's not very long):
- "(...) by summer in the mid-term review of the i2010 strategy, I will publish a new indicator of broadband take-up in Europe that compares national performance, not only on broadband penetration but also geographic coverage, speed, competition and price." This is important, since penetration only doesn't tell the whole story. Compare the OECD Broadband Portal.
- "Further service development is likely to result in the need for significantly higher broadband speeds of up to 100 megabit per second or more." There is some room for debate - I have shown some scepticism myself, but 100 Mb/s must be the milestone to focus on. Among the many drivers will also be Web 3.0, which may have significant implications for both bandwidth and storage.
- "I found a widely held view that the European regulatory framework and its emphasis on access obligations to open up competition is not at all the impediment to investment and innovation that some market players claim, (...)." Bravo.
- "How we treat next generation access is therefore the single most important policy question in the telecoms sector today."
- "(...) one of the potential attractions of functionally separating access networks is to make this incentive structure clearer and more operational." Mind you: functional, not structural. KPN is a good example of a telco staving off the 'threat' of structural separation by making functional separation really work (transparancy, good portfolio of services, happy wholesale customers).
- "My worry is that such bundling will, de facto, stifle choice and innovation."
- "Let me be very direct: except where the structure of the market has non-discrimination built into it such as in a well designed system of functional or structural separation the incentive of the telecom company is to design new infrastructures in a way that controls or chokes off competition."
Furthermore, she looks at the "three different models of network upgrade":
- FTTC + VDSL. "In terms of open competition however there are serious concerns that VDSL could be attractive to incumbent telecom operators, because they require competitive market entrants to substantially scale up their investment in switching capacity." But "(...) unbundling requirements at street cabinet would have to continue to allow competitive access operators to stay in business."
- FTTB + PON. "But the flexibility in the medium term may be more limited, not least because the end user equipment and the equipment in the network have to be compatible. Unbundling these passive fibre networks is therefore more difficult and the incumbent increases control." (...) "It is unclear that passive optical networks can be unbundled in the way that we see today on copper networks. This requires close attention and probably experimentation with novel architectures, using wave division technology to offer virtual unbundling as a more flexible alternative to bitstream access."
- FTTH. "The difficulty here is cost: existing ducts are often too small to allow multiple fibres to pass through and therefore major construction spending is required. This is by far the most expensive option." (...) "Point-to-point fibre deployment, meanwhile is rarely being deployed by private market investors. Certainly, this is due to its high cost, but it is also probably due to its openness. Where we do see it being used is in open access schemes initiated by municipalities, in cities such as Stockholm and Amsterdam. These schemes are local partnerships that take a pure 'infrastructure utility' approach by building ducts and end to end dark fibre and then leasing access to service providers. Clearly by so doing these cities have created for their business and citizens a future proof network infrastructure and for the investors in the networks a very long term stable return on their investment given that ducts and dark fibre have a potential operating life of several decades. Under these conditions of guaranteed open access circumstances, perhaps, infrastructural competition is less important than an open and high performance platform. However, the municipal solution seems unlikely to be relevant for all of Europe and could lead to a very fragmented landscape." This highlights the fact that the EC is not a friend of munifiber and is very critical about them. "Whichever infrastructure route we take forward, my conclusion is clear: regulation will have a role to play to keep networks open and to guarantee progress, efficiency and choice."
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Behind the end of OEN and Sprint/Clearwire

Thursday, September 06, 2007
How to prepare the investment community for FTTH
FTTH once more demanded most of our attention. As I see it, telcos are trying to pursuade the investment community to get to grips with it.
Below are my take-aways.
1. VDSL
My companion strongly believes in the viability of VDSL, mainly because FTTH embodies a difficult business case, but also because FTTH simply cannot be rolled-out quickly enough.
Being a member of the Smiling Fiber gang, I of course have no doubts as to the demand side of the equation. FTTH is the end game. Moreover, a back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that you need at least something like 30 Mbps in the mid term (to support several HD TV sets, BB and voice). In order to guarantee this kind of bandwidth, you really need peak performances of around 100 Mbps. QED. (Buffering a few seconds will also go a long way in raising QoS.)
As to the roll-out speed, I suppose telcos do have a point when they install VDSL – for the interim. Look at Verizon: most of the FiOS assets are built in greenfieldish places, which leaves the company extremely vulnerable in places like Manhattan, where Cablevison (Optimum) et al are upgrading. Who knows how many years before Verizon starts digging up those streets of Manhattan (the potholes could come in handy).
2. FTTH
As I have noted before, no matter what telcos say in public, they are all aware of the necessity to move to FTTH, even if this may be some years away.
Public telcos are very much aware of investor focus on FCF and concern over FTTH. However, I see them working on multiple fronts subtly preparing the investment community for the big leap into fiber. PR-related strategies include:
- Stress the reality of fiber today. Thousands of miles are fiberized already, ‘only’ the local loop remains.
- Talk about greenfields. Both KPN and BT say they will roll-out to new boroughs. Now I happen to live in a big new housing development area (no crisis here), but what I have is … copper. A friend of mine who has recently moved into this area (see Map to the right) hasn’t had her home connected yet, but I am pretty sure it will be copper. In other words, committing to greenfields must be taken with a grain of salt but it is great PR.
- Acknowledge the benefits. Capex may be high, but opex will drop dramatically. And superior services can be delivered.
- Point to international developments. Not only PTT-like companies (Verizon, NTT, KT, Telekom Slovenije), but altnets as well (Iliad, Neuf Cegetel, SoftBank, Orange Slovensko), and even MSOs (Numericable, a Japanese co-op).
- Drive the costs down. Verizon publishes decreasing costs for both passing and connecting homes, benefitting from its scale. Mergers will generate some economies of scale. Further, choose point-to-multipoint (sharing a fiber strand) PON technology (however, sharing fiber up to the OLT location may not be sufficient in the longer term, so you may prefer active ethernet over dedicated fiber all the way to the ONT). Also, make sure you have a sound in-home strategy ready, in order to avoid a costly addition to your opex. There is a variety of wired (HomePNA, MoCA, HomePlug for using copper, coax, PLC) and wireless (WiFi 802.11n Draft 2.0, WiMedia UWB) standards available.
- Try to get state subsidies. This strategy worked well in Korea. Point to the economic and social benefits of a FTTH network.
- Wait until greenfield (and other) FTTH build-outs represent let’s say 5% of your access lines. That will be the time to say: “We are at 5% already, and these homes have double the ARPU and a tenth of the churn of the copper base. And you didn’t even see our FCF suffer!”
3. Separation
We disagreed over the issue of investment incentives. Conventional wisdom is that full separation is, if not unnecessary, expensive and bad for network investments. It is supposed to take away any incentive for the NetCo to invest.
Personally, I do not quite see this. In my view, the NetCo would do wise by investing for the long term, enabling it to offer an extensive portfolio to its (wholesale) customers. Of course, there are the usual investment uncertainties; who could guarantee take-up of your shiny services? But I believe this can be dealt with. There are many new services waiting to be (built or) expanded, including monitoring, eHealth, video telephony, home access to corporate VPNs, etc.
4. Consolidation
We briefly spoke about KPN, and its Telfort, Getronics and Tele2 Belgium deals.
After our meeting was over, I got the idea for the perfect answer for Belgacom. If KPN are not stearing toward a merger with their Belgian counterpart and instead go for head-to-head competition, why not make some acquisitions in Holland? (Not unlike Swisscom buying FastWeb).
Tele2 seems to be committed to the Netherlands (a large scale ad campaign has started in relation to its 10th anniversary), DT is buying Orange NL (but may sell-on the former Wanadoo LLU assets to Tele2, bbned, Scarlet or Vodafone) and even bbned (Telecom Italia) is here to stay (it has just started a campaign for the Alice brand, which is new to Holland).
So what is left? Reggefiber! Perhaps Dik Wessels is ready to sell out of this FTTH vehicle, and with Belgacom funding roll-out could be accelerated. Reggefiber appears to be a very disciplined company, which is making a success out of FTTH. In addition, it would be a nice testing ground for Belgacom.