DT Eyes FTTH Solution to German Opex Issue

NICE, France -- Next Generation Optical Networks -- Is Deutsche Telekom about to change its position on FTTH?

The German telecom incumbent has so far refused to make any firm promises about a widespread rollout of FTTH networks in its domestic market. That's perhaps not surprising. According to Sascha Vorbeck, Deutsche Telekom AG (NYSE: DT)'s head of network development core, experts reckon it would cost between €60 billion ($67 billion) and €80 billion ($89 billion) to connect every home in Germany using fiber-to-the-home technology.

To boost connection speeds for customers, and meet the challenge from high-speed cable networks, the operator has been using technologies like VDSL2 and vectoring, which bring fiber closer to premises but retain the "last-mile" copper connection. This is far more economical, from a capex perspective, but it means customers cannot benefit from the very highest-speed services found in other parts of the world. Germany has a rather unambitious goal of providing 50Mbit/s services to 80% of its premises by 2018. (See DT's Jan van Damme Flexes Quads.)

There are further downsides to those copper-based broadband technologies, however, as Vorbeck outlined at today's Next Generation Optical Networks event in Nice, France. Because broadband signals travel poorly over long distances on copper networks, Deutsche Telekom is being forced to maintain sites that are just a few hundred meters from customer premises. Those could be phased out in an FTTH environment.

According to Vorbeck, Germany features a total of 2,059 cities -- large and small -- and Deutsche Telekom currently maintains nearly 10,000 sites across these markets. The introduction of FTTH and greater "automation" would allow the operator to locate sites at a distance of up to 18km from customer premises and reduce the total number of sites to around 3,300. This would clearly help Deutsche Telekom to slash opex and fatten margins while sales are under pressure: Fixed-line revenues for the first three months of 2016 fell by 1.7%, to about €2.4 billion ($2.7 billion), compared with the year-earlier period.

For more fixed broadband market coverage and insights, check out our dedicated broadband content channel here on Light Reading.

While it would be a mistake to conflate fiber infrastructure with all-IP technology, Vorbeck also suggests that copper dependency is hindering the efforts to retire old platforms and complete the transition to an all-IP network. This, in turn, could have a knock-on impact on the introduction of various software and virtualization technologies, which form a key part of Deutsche Telekom's plans to develop a single network spanning all of its central and eastern European markets. (See DT's Pan-Net Picks Up the Pace.)

As previously announced, Deutsche Telekom wants to switch off all of its PSTN-based systems in Germany by the end of 2018. But that target looks challenging: Just 37% of Deutsche Telekom's fixed lines were IP-based in March this year, up from 25% in March 2015. At the current rate of progress, Deutsche Telekom will have converted only 78% of its fixed lines to all-IP technology by March 2019.

Deutsche Telekom continues to base its broadband strategy on the prolonged use of copper. Having already made investments in VDSL2 and vectoring, it is now looking at another copper-based technology called G.fast, which could bring about further improvements in connection speeds by extending the frequency range over which signals travel. Yet executives are increasingly talking about FTTH as a "final step" the company will have to take. The reasons for that look clearer than ever. But if the investment hurdle is as big as experts make out, a Deutsche Telekom-led FTTH rollout could be a long time coming.

— Iain Morris, Circle me on Google+ Follow me on TwitterVisit my LinkedIn profile, News Editor, Light Reading

brooks7 6/29/2016 | 11:39:19 AM
NTT & Verizon  

Could provide case studies on the topic.


msilbey 6/29/2016 | 12:02:35 PM
Wireless implications too There are wireless benefits to deeper-fiber networks too, particularly with the development of 5G. I wonder if that tips the capex scales too.
inkstainedwretch 6/29/2016 | 1:03:29 PM
FTT...(x)? So but wait? I don't understand why fiber to the home is even being considered. I've been told repeatedly that it would be deeply and profoundly impractical to have to install FTTH in most of Europe, simply because of the way most cities are built.

From a tech standpoint, reducing the length of copper loops always helps with DSL throughput. So fiber to the node -- extending fiber deeper, as Mari notes in another comment --  would presumably be perfectly adequate to get to hundreds of megabits-per-second with very very short VDSL loops, or by migrating to g.fast on the copper reach.

If that's the case, what advantage would FTTH have that would overwhelm the cost, difficulty, and perhaps the pointlessness of going that route rather than fiber-deeper?

-- Brian Santo


brooks7 6/29/2016 | 1:08:41 PM
Re: FTT...(x)? Denser than Tokyo?

Its a great myth.


jayakd0 7/1/2016 | 11:01:32 AM
Re: FTT...(x)? @Seven, how was that (fibre deployment to enable FTTH) achieved in Tokyo?
brooks7 7/1/2016 | 3:08:41 PM
Re: FTT...(x)? @jayakd0.

The same way that it was throughout the FiOS properties.  NTT deployed the fiber in underground and aerial (whatever is appropriate).

The challenge of fibre deployment is the business case.  The number 1 factor in the case is NOT construction.  It is line loss.  In the case of Verizon, they were under extreme pressure from Cablevision (in particular) and other MSOs.  Not only were they losing on the broadband front, they were losing phone lines.  FiOS was built to stem that tide and has been wildly successful from that standpoint.  

Why didn't AT&T follow suit?  If you look at where AT&T is (Texas, California, now the South East) there was more new lines being installed and not as much pressure on lines.  So, AT&T went the U-verse route - trying to save some money.  They are working to play a "lose slowly" game for residential broadband.  They have ftth available for markets that they want to hotly contest, but have not done something ambitious.

NTT was getting its head handed to it by the alternate DSL providers in Japan.  FTTH was a way for NTT to build a network that it didn't have to unbundle and share.  So, it was a lock out the competition move.  This is somewhat different than Verizon - who did have some CLEC competition but its primary competition was from MSOs.

The whole highlight here is that competition can drive FTTH deployments.  Note the utter lack of wireline compeition in Europe.  In spite of article trumpeting FTTH taking off in Europe on this site for the last 10 years based on pronouncements from service providers, almost nothing has happened.

The only other way to get FTTH built is through governement intervention.  South Korea is an example of that.  Australia should have been an example of that but has fallen flat.  

Back to the business case, Construction Costs is the #2 factor...which is why Verizon started in areas with Aerial Plant.

And as a note, none of this has changed for the past 15 years.



danielcawrey 7/4/2016 | 1:58:32 PM
Re: NTT & Verizon Amazing to think that PSTN systems are still up and running. 

I get it; there are a number of operations that still require it. But now that we're entering into an age of IoT, I think a lot of these older data connections will be upgraded. That's a good thing, given these legacy systems are a bear to maintain. 
Sign In