Completing FTTP builds

There have been a number of threads recently, here and on ispreview, that suggest that OR may part-build some exchange areas with FTTP, but never complete them, or at least not for a very long time. I've always tended to assume that OR will want to be rid of their copper network just as soon as they can kill it off, for all the well known reasons of not having to maintain 2 different networks, old and unreliable copper wiring and kit, shortage of parts, shortage of suitably skilled engineers etc.

I have an old Ofcom consultation document* on withdrawing copper services - I think it's still available here, but I haven't checked this is the same version I have. In it there's a proposed timetable (Figure 1) for a process, starting with the 75% complete stop sell on copper, then a 2-year period following an area being declared FTTP "complete" (which has a somewhat vague definition) before price controls on copper products are lifted. The clock to full copper switch off doesn't start ticking until this "complete" stage is achieved.

In this document (2.13) Ofcom say that part of the reasoning behind the proposed timetable is to incentivise OR to complete exchange areas, rather than build just enough to deter altnet competition in an area and then move on, leaving other customers stranded.

My recollection is that, apart from the 75% stop sell, this never made it into the final WFTMR for 2021-5, because it was thought no exchange areas (except Salisbury and Mildenhall) would get that far by end 2025. But it's been a while, and my memory is not what it was. Probably something like this will reappear in the next Ofcom review period.

So have I misunderstood, and is completing an exchange area not the incentive for OR that I've thought it to be?

--
* Consultation: Copper retirement – conditions under which copper regulation could be completely withdrawn in ultrafast exchanges, Ofcom, 15/10/2020

Hi,

In reply to a post by Thaumaturge:

There have been a number of threads recently, here and on ispreview, that suggest that OR may part-build some exchange areas with FTTP, but never complete them, or at least not for a very long time. I've always tended to assume that OR will want to be rid of their copper network just as soon as they can kill it off, for all the well known reasons of not having to maintain 2 different networks, old and unreliable copper wiring and kit, shortage of parts, shortage of suitably skilled engineers etc.

I have an old Ofcom consultation document* on withdrawing copper services - I think it's still available here, but I haven't checked this is the same version I have. In it there's a proposed timetable (Figure 1) for a process, starting with the 75% complete stop sell on copper, then a 2-year period following an area being declared FTTP "complete" (which has a somewhat vague definition) before price controls on copper products are lifted. The clock to full copper switch off doesn't start ticking until this "complete" stage is achieved.

In this document (2.13) Ofcom say that part of the reasoning behind the proposed timetable is to incentivise OR to complete exchange areas, rather than build just enough to deter altnet competition in an area and then move on, leaving other customers stranded.

My recollection is that, apart from the 75% stop sell, this never made it into the final WFTMR for 2021-5, because it was thought no exchange areas (except Salisbury and Mildenhall) would get that far by end 2025. But it's been a while, and my memory is not what it was. Probably something like this will reappear in the next Ofcom review period.

So have I misunderstood, and is completing an exchange area not the incentive for OR that I've thought it to be?

--
* Consultation: Copper retirement – conditions under which copper regulation could be completely withdrawn in ultrafast exchanges, Ofcom, 15/10/2020

Look at https://www.openreach.co.uk/cpportal/products/the-al... to see how the two different stop sell approaches are implemented.

BT's priorities with respect to service termination are as follows:
1. Get rid of the PSTN - should be gone by end of January 2027 (note, this is closure of the telephone service, not closure of all services over copper).
2. Close exchanges which don't have a long term future (i.e around 80% of them) - this will involve closure of all copper services, probably on an exchange by exchange basis. There is currently no fixed timescale for this other then a vague "close 100 exchanges by 2030" target (except for three pilot exchanges where there is a slightly more immediate, but not fixed, timescale).

Note that closing an exchange is dependant on getting rid the of PSTN lines served from that exchange (gone by Jan 2027) and getting rid of any ADSL served from that exchange (currently no fixed timescale) (in addition there may be other services like leased lines which also need to be moved elsewhere but I'm ignoring the non-consumer services here).

At the moment, closure of FTTC (VDSL and G.fast) service is not a priority for BT - FTTC is served from the exchanges which will not be closed. In reality, if an FTTC area is overbuilt with FTTP then FTTC closure will happen naturally over time in any event.

So have I misunderstood, and is completing an exchange area not the incentive for OR that I've thought it to be?

I suspect your misunderstanding may arise from a couple of issues …..

the copper network, mainly the D sides, will be around for a very long time yet. Regulation, and pressure from the ‘sell it cheap, pile it high’ end of the CP market have certainly added weight to the pressure. So this, and to some degree the E sides too will have to be maintained.

Exchange areas have such very varied network topography, that full completion is really a very distant dream…. what customers want is a long way from what others believe they do. Openreach have shareholders, and costs to pay, to throw their hats entirely in the ring for FTTP roll out would be an enormous financial burden, quite likely an un bearable one. Roll out where it can be done quickly and relatively easily, then wait … this is common sense, especially in the cowboy infested waters of altnets being allowed to cherry pick which bit of your network they choose sod up.

Add to all this, FTTP still isn’t perceived as the killer product it really ought to be. Go walk round Salisbury, what an enormous amount of homes and businesses clearly haven’t taken up FTTP and will just sit tight until forced to do so.

I think to achieve the figures without going bust will be a neigh on impossible task for Openreach.

Just my 5 penn’eth

In reply to a post by Dassa:

2. Close exchanges which don't have a long term future (i.e around 80% of them) - this will involve closure of all copper services

It doesn't though, because FTTC has no dependency on the local exchanges. The fibre goes directly to the head-end exchange (the same one that would serve FTTP for the area), and the copper goes directly between the cabinets and the houses. The dependency on the local exchange will vanish in January 2027 when analogue voice services are turned off.

There is *some* incentive to get rid of copper completely: e.g. lower fault rate, and reducing the cross-skilling of engineers. But set against the very high cost of installing FTTP to certain areas, such as those with DIG copper, means that pockets of FTTC-only are likely to remain for a very long time.

The big prize will be the PSTN switch off saving a shed load of energy costs.

I expect the copper network to wither away as punters gradually move to fibre or wireless. When I started working on the network nearly everyone had a rented dial phone. It's difficult to pin a date on when nobody did.

In reply to a post by FibreBubble:

The big prize will be the PSTN switch off saving a shed load of energy costs.

Probably not a very green saving of energy costs. It looks to me like a shift of energy costs to the customer and I would hazard a guess that it costs the customer a lot more energy, depending on the comparison bases you choose.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

In reply to a post by FibreBubble:

The big prize will be the PSTN switch off saving a shed load of energy costs.

Probably not a very green saving of energy costs. It looks to me like a shift of energy costs to the customer and I would hazard a guess that it costs the customer a lot more energy, depending on the comparison bases you choose.

Given that:
1. almost everyone now has broadband, and is powering their router anyway;
2. fewer and fewer people use landline voice, given the ubiquity of mobile phones
I'd say the energy costs to the consumer are zero.

I might be wild off the mark, but I reckon just 1-2 watts per ONT would easily cover what an old copper circuit would take to power continuously just for dial tone. Then there is additional ADSL kit or FTTC DSLAMs etc etc. Let alone all the other run and maintenance charges, which become ruinous as the old exchange kit goes on extended life support from their suppliers. GPON / XGS-PON etc really is much, cheaper to run and performance of course is 1000x times better.

The extra over cost for running that ONT to the customer is around £2 a year in leccy.

[pedant mode on] ‘wide of the mark’ [pedant mode off]











sorry

Born to be wild(ly off the mark!) 🙈 😝