Eventually yes

PSTN turn off slated for 2025

So, is that prediction made on the presumption that everyone won't be served by an exchange, but by a different technology such as Gigaclear?

Edited by deleted (Sat 20-May-17 10:03:57)

Once everyone can be served by a fibre variant (FTTC/P) then only the head ends would be needed as this is where the fibres connect to. As a result of everyone being on some sort of fibre connectivity, then FVA/VoIP can be utilised which removes the need for all of the copper pstn kit in the exchanges.

Ahh ok, I thought so. So, basically only the exchanges that have the fibre in them will be kept open, whereas the smaller and only telephone exchanges will be closed?

Not strictly true as almost all exchanges have some fibre e.g. how WBC ADSl2+ and LLU ADSL2+ is linked back to core networks.

Only exchanges that are GEA Handover nodes are likely to remain, and even then you can reduce size to just a few 19" rack style cabinets

Probably, but as they occupy less space in each building, the leaseholder may look to not renew leases to find a better return

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Probably, but as they occupy less space in each building, the leaseholder may look to not renew leases to find a better return

Which brings us right back to the irreversible but lunatic decision taken many years ago by BT.

My wife spent all her working life in first the GPO, then BT when the split with the postal service took place. Two major changes happened to her work in the properties division in respect of exchange building.

First was the change from acquiring expansion space to cater for growth, preferably immediately adjacent to existing exchanges. That changed very rapidly once the new much smaller equipment became available, so she started selling instead. Nothing strange about that, but remarkable in the way a job and how all jobs in all businesses are about to.

But the point you just made about the leaseholder shows the daft change. The principle when buying exchange buildings was that they had to be purchased freehold, not leasehold. (Ground rents being a different matter). There was a complete policy change at some point. All retained buildings had to be sold and leased back.

Good for the balance sheet and shareholder dividends, long-term as stupid as building hospitals under Public Private Partnerships.

The chickens on both are currently coming home to roost. As they will during the life of Hinckley Point and more so at the end of the fixed price period.

Sorry to bring non-exchange issues into the thread, it was to demonstrate how the leaseholders leaseholding of exchanges came about and how stupid it is in the long term.
_{^{Edit: Typo "leaseholders" correction.}}

Edited by RobertoS (Sat 20-May-17 15:53:13)

That was the brainwave of Ben the clog.

I think it pre dated Ben. Peter bonfire?

Makes sense, thanks.