Posts Tagged ‘FTTH’

The European Commission issued on Monday 20/9/2010 the new (and final) Recommendation on regulated access to Next Generation Access Networks [C(2010)6223]. Also, the Commission circulated the related communication C(2010)472 with title “European Broadband: investing in digitally driven growth”.

The two documents elaborate and explain the vision and the implementation strategy envisaged by the European Commission for the NGA development in the continent. They offer a good understanding on how EC plans to go about the realization of the European Digital Agenda in terms of broadband development by 2020. The recommendation focuses on operators designated with SMP (i.e. mainly incumbents) and related remedies by the NRAs while the communication articulates a wider spectrum of actions for broadband promotion.

Here’s a what stands out at first reading:

1. NRA are in for a lot of work. They are required to reassess national markets and divide national markets to sub-national geographical segments. There is nothing tedious about this since geographical segmentation of the national markets will have significant impact to the definition of SMP and the subsequent application of appropriate measures. Certainty and consistency are fundamentally important in regulatory approaches by the NRA, thus NRAs should be able to explain how they intend to adapt remedies in markets 4 and 5 in future market reviews in reaction to likely changes in market conditions [Recommendation seems to imply large scale installations. How will NRA respond in small scale deployments in selected areas in the cities?]
2. The Commission is interested to see alternative operators engaging  in FTTH deployments. First, these provisions clearly focus on a (functional and/or structural) separation of the fiber access network  of the incumbent’s deployment. This certainly challenges the traditional vertical business model, and it is rather unlikely IMO to promote independent investment by the incumbents. Second, the recommendation acknowledges specifically the need for operators (including incumbents) to collaborate and suggests the contribution of the NRAs when such a collaboration is underway or planned.
3. The Commission acknowledges the role of the public sector in broadband development. Public sponsoring of NGA infrastructures is highlighted and a number of measures are outlined for public co-investment in NGA. In particular, the role of local and regional authorities (public administration and public utilities) is also acknowledged and plans to support potential municipal undertakings are announced for 2011.
4. Finally, here’s a couple of things of interest: (a) With regard to greenfield deployments, copper is not required if fiber local loop is installed as long as as long as equivalent products to existing products are offered [Will that include fiber LLU?], (b) Next generation WBA products will not be necessary if unbundling is successful and functional separation, and margins squeeze are monitored carefully.

These documents increase visibility to EC plans for broadband development in the continent and set a clearer perspective. Eventually, infrastructure-based competition will not necessarily require the deployment of redundant FTTH infrastructures rather more than one competing platforms, i.e.  PSTN/DSL, Cable/DOCSIS and FTTH/Ethernet,PON.

This is a quick note on my first impressions from the latest EC plans (although a more detailed review wouldn’t be such a bad idea). As always, I would welcome any additional pointers, opinions or disagreement. Feel free to fire up!