If that is what is rolled out to a particular area, surely the demand levels will be identical to if FTTC had been rolled out there?
It was my being sassy. High demand for NGA would justify deploying FTTP straight off the bat. High demand is the explanation Openreach give for deploying more FTTP in the Milton Keynes region than pretty much the rest of England outside of Cornwall put together.
Openreach's allergy to CapEx has become abundantly clear, and areas where they're deploying a second FTTC cabinet at considerable cost, and will follow it up by deploying G.Fast, and follow that up by eventually deploying FTTP are a testament to that attitude. They're like someone running on a payday loan who'll pay way more in the future to avoid having to pay now.
Openreach's demand calculations were pulled out of their hindmost, though most of their calculations appear to be pulled out of their hindmost in my experience. My own 96 home passed cabinet with an expected take up of ~25% according to the commercial modelling unit head which ended up being a 400 home passed cabinet with take up of ~50% comes to mind. Bear in mind that Openreach installed all the lines on this cabinet but appeared entirely unaware of what they installed and stubbornly insisted for the best part of a year that the 96 figure was correct.
Their enabling of a cabinet passing less than 200 homes with zero additional premises to be built with a 288 line Huawei just down the road while saying this one was unviable comes to mind. That cabinet hasn't filled a single line card as far as I'm aware, this one only enabled after a campaign lasting nearly a year is on its last set of ties and being evaluated for a second cabinet. Last engineer who attended it informed he'd never worked on a cabinet that had sold so quickly.
The 2.5 billion commercial expenditure figure that Openreach bandy about is likewise laughable. Thanks to their cutting the FTTP down from 25% of the NGA deployment to virtually nothing outside of subsidised Cornwall that has left a figure closer to 1.3 billion of CapEx, not 2.5 billion. A large proportion of the 'commercial' brownfield FTTP has been in Milton Keynes and has been a complete disaster with an overbudget, delayed roll out. They deployed in the wrong places and on hindsight know it.
It's a really sad state of affairs when Kingston Communications invest more freely than BT do. Longer term it'll cost BT more as they install hardware in high demand areas only to rip it out and overbuild it but, hey, the money men are happy in the short term.
Ahh that's better.
Edited by Ignitionnet (Fri 02-May-14 22:41:29)