@PatrickS and @RogerG and all others:

Thank you for the detailed reactions!

💐 or 🍻

I may have understood the business part of prioritization. That’s why the city and the more densely populated Aglo communities in Kt. ZH received glass first. Gives more profit in the short term / sooner and can be used to finance the more expensive rural or mountain region connections. With a planned EBITDA of 4.6-4.7 billion for 2023, I consider the argument to be complaining at a high level.

😉

Regarding the communities: A few years ago they built the sewerage system for the separation system. The community invited people to the singing hall and provided information. Mr. Andiroid then asked whether empty conduits would also be installed for Swisscom’s fiber optic connection. The sewer system runs parallel to the copper route. Apparently both requests were not answered. I think there are communication problems here and there. After the drop was moved at the end of the year and only a small 80×80cm loop shaft was needed, I could also understand why “you” didn’t respond.

👍

On the technical side: What I still don’t understand is the technical prioritization of the drops before the feeder. The “last mile” was also rebuilt after the backbones. If you argue that there are too few fibers in the feeders to the DSLAM, then this was already known at the Green Table 10/15 years ago. I don’t understand your technical argument with FTTO, clogged Zores and scarce fiber reserves, even if I can understand the reasons given. Or to put it another way: Given the reasons given, what is a new insight that has emerged in the last 20 years?

😬

On politics: I wasn’t there at the “Green Table”. What I understood is that back then there should have been 4 fibers per participant-Anschluss and today “suddenly” only one fiber per ₁₀ connections should be possible. A factor of 50-100 cannot be a calculation error!? In an environment that has been liberalized since the 1990s, I understand that competition drives down prices and the monopolistic technology P2MP does not. Higher price, higher profit, bigger bonus, stronger market power. Fredy can complain about the de-facto monopoly, right?

😠

Finally: It is clear to me that my arguments are just above the regular regulars’ table level. With the Swisscom prize for the years 2019-2022 it was possible to build a tube of the Gotthard base tunnel. Is that really not enough for a comprehensive upgrade of the Swiss-wide feeders? Not even those that would have had to be built after 2019?

💸

I’m still looking forward to all the reactions to this thread and wish everyone an enjoyable summer!

🍹🏝️😎

@andiroid

Of course, there are always two sides when it comes to civil engineering 😉 and mistakes happen - including on the part of Swisscom.

Now about your technical approach. Of course, with the mCAN expansions, a 432 Fs cable could have been inserted into each slot.

In order to remain as fact-based as possible, I report on my own experiences.

Well, we have already mentioned many times that many pipe systems are full of capacity. A so-called mini fiber optic cable can usually be inserted. It’s usually no longer enough for a big “beating” like a 432 Fs GGT. A 288Fs is sometimes too small for P2P. You are in a dead end.

A mini cable can also be pulled in up to 300m. If the pipe section is longer, you will have problems with the tensile force. The cable could be damaged. Outside the cities it is therefore out of the question. That leaves GGT cables. Depending on the sewer system and its occupancy, the 432 is unsuitable. So you resort to the 288 or 192 (smaller outside diameter, therefore a little more flexible to retract). These in turn may no longer be sufficient.

The basic idea of ​​the mCAN was to bring high bandwidths as quickly as possible to areas where there is no UBB Anschluss yet. Swisscom made this promise in 2013 and achieved it. This required the insertion of fiber optic cables into the shafts and the installation of the “signal converters” in the shaft.

I can’t judge whether and what the idea was at the time regarding dimensions. I was not part of the project group. After a pilot phase, the necessary processes were mapped and built according to guidelines. It’s no use discussing why, why, why. We won’t be able to provide the answers and we won’t change the whole fact.

---

@PatrickS wrote:

@robbieB

Sorry that I can’t give you better information. At the same time, I would also like to state that I cannot/do not want to give any binding information. Especially in the FTTH environment, expansion plans and projects can change suddenly - cooperation agreements, road renovations, etc. That’s why; Be patient, yes - a lot is still possible 😉

It is in Swisscom’s interest to connect all houses with FTTH. Preferably immediately. But as we all know, this would be a huge financial investment. There are areas where it is relatively easy - but unfortunately there are also areas or mountain villages where it is simply not worth it. RogerG has already gone further. explains in detail that a construction always has to be amortized within a certain time horizon. Furthermore, enormous resources are required in the field of civil engineering, which are not limitless. There is a shortage of skilled workers.

That’s why we have to be patient.

Oh dear communities… in my work at Swisscom I have already worked in several departments and specialist areas. I was also responsible for civil engineering projects. Communities often did not inform us about projects. Or only when the road renovations were almost finished. It is impossible to plan an entire project perimeter/needs analysis within one working day.

And so it happened as it had to happen; In areas where it was necessary to expand the pipes, none could be built because some of the trenches had already been compacted again.

Or an anecdote from the troubleshooting service as “Good Night Gschichtli”; A road was renewed including various works pipes (Swisscom was informed too late) and the surface covering has already been installed. Suddenly a cable malfunction. On site, a hole had to be opened in the new decking for the enclosure. You can imagine that the enthusiasm on the part of the community/canton was very limited 😉 During the renovation work, an excavator hit our Zores and damaged 2 lead cables. In order to avoid costs and construction delays, the Zores was straightened and covered. The lead cables were not damaged externally. However, because the copper cores in lead cables were insulated with paper, the paper on the copper cores tore. There were small hairline cracks in the lead jacket. Over time, moisture built up in the cable and the error messages increased.

Greetings

---

Hey @PatrickS Everything’s fine, as it is. Thanks anyway for your detailed information on the subject of fiber optic networks and the expansion potential in my location/(dense) settlement area.

Yes, my expectation would be if the community or The building department should tear up our streets for renovations so that they also take you on board. And otherwise there will be a KoPa with the GWP!

Cheerz

Maybe this will interest someone here. Over the next 8-10 years there could be federal support for fiber optic expansion in unprofitable areas.

The federal government’s high-broadband strategy report was published today:

To implement the federal government’s high broadband strategy, the Federal Council is proposing a funding program - as required in the postulate. It should only initiate network expansion on a subsidiary basis where private investments are lacking and can demonstrably not be profitable. All wired ones should be included
Can benefit from connections that cannot provide a performance of at least 1 Gbit/s and
where there is corresponding demand, but no expansion can be expected due to the high expansion costs. The program should focus primarily on the only wired technology that is considered future-proof, FTTH.

[https://www.bakom.admin.ch/bakom/de/home/das-bakom/organisation/legal-foundations/bundesratsgeschaefte/hochbreitbandnetz\_schweiz.html](https://www.bakom.admin.ch/ bakom/de/home/das-bakom/organisation/legal-basis/bundesratsgeschaefte/hochbreitbandnetz_schweiz.html)

Here is another post from July 5th, 2023:

[https://www.watson.ch/digital/wirtschaft/699663028-glasfibro-schlamassel-von-swisscom-koennte-noch-2023-geloest- Werden] (https://www.watson.ch/digital/wirtschaft/699663028-glasfibro-schlamassel-von-swisscom-koennte-noch-2023-geloest- Werden)

🫤

I also got a P2MP cable pulled in. But since then… Federal Court forever, because fellow Berbers sense disadvantages. Can they prove that too?

Really an ‘awkward’ question, sorry that I have to answer you like that. So, obviously there is evidence that has been proven. Otherwise the ComCo wouldn’t go into it at all, especially that the Federal Court had also confirmed this with the precautionary measures! Point! Comco should make a decision or result by the end of the year. And yes, in the future only P2P construction will be used, you just have to be patient until your Anschluss is returned. Being rebuilt!!

Cheerz

@diJis

At the time, people were talking about unbundling the last mile when it came to the copper network.

This was then declared a law and this guaranteed Swisscom’s subscription competitors that they would be able to rent a direct copper line between the headquarters and the end customers from Swisscom at any time.

When it came to the fiber optic network, the Federal Council wanted to write the same principle into the law during the last revision of the Telecommunications Act in 2018, but this was then rejected by Parliament (with a relatively narrow vote).

A very intensive lobbying activity by Swisscom is said to have played an important role 🙂

That’s why Swisscom, with its technical idea of ​​preventing free access to the “last mile” in the fiber optic network, has not already been stopped directly by the Telecommunications Act, but because this would also create a potentially competitive and monopoly-like situation on the last mile fiber optic network. was only temporarily slowed down by antitrust law.

In a sense, by actually enforcing competition law, the courts are only improving Parliament’s “sloppy” work on the Telecommunications Act, which was influenced by lobbying. 🙂

Since I accuse Parliament of “sloppy” work in the last revision of the Telecommunications Act, I have now briefly researched the respective arguments for protecting or not protecting the last fiber optic mile in the deliberations in the National Council.

The end result on the question of the last fiber optic mile in autumn 2018 was:

“In order to guarantee effective competition, Parliament is proposing a different approach. The Federal Council should report every three years on the development of costs and access to fiber optic connections.”

Of course, everyone has to decide for themselves whether they want to classify this as sloppy or as a simple refusal to work by the legislative authority in the Telecommunications Act.

---

@Werner wrote:

When it came to the copper network, people were talking about unbundling the last mile.

This was then declared a law and this guaranteed Swisscom’s subscription competitors that they would be able to rent a direct copper line between the headquarters and the end customers from Swisscom at any time.

---

@Werner How many 3rd ISPs do you think still use this today?

@Werner: Thank you very much for your well-founded, factual contributions! I always enjoy reading them.🎖️

I don’t think anything of the parliament in Federal Bern. Turncoats and rubberbacks who give more attention to lobbyists and their armchair roots than to being there for the people.

And that’s why you don’t vote or vote, I assume? 😉

---

@Werner wrote:

Since the decision to unbundle the copper network was made 20 years ago, and the importance of the copper network for fast Internet connections is completely different today, I assume that unbundled copper lines, in contrast to fiber optics, are no longer actively in demand at Swisscom today become. 🙂

---

That’s it, the 3rd ISP soon realized that the maintenance of their own equipment, the management, monitoring, taxes, troubleshooting, energy costs, rent, including transfers when moving, etc. was simply more expensive than it was BBCS service had to be obtained from Swisscom for the line.

The outcry always comes first and they invest resources in decoupling themselves as much as possible and wanting to do better themselves (it’s somehow embedded in our genes). Once the investments have been made, you realize that the operation is quite expensive and you optimize everything possible to get the OPEX down. In the end, BBCS is used again because you only have to worry about CPE costs and the fees for BBCS and they are quite stable.

I’m curious to see what it looks like in 10 years… (although I won’t notice anymore, LOL)

There is a risk of re-monopolization and a lack of investment in less developed regions

I’m curious in how many of these less developed regions competitors actually put their own hardware in their headquarters, e.g. Init7 writes that they only do it if there is corresponding market potential.

@Roger G

Regardless of whether there is now at least one dedicated fiber per customer or not, I also believe that most 3rd ISPs will continue to rent the BBCS service from Swisscom if the B2B offer is attractive to them, mainly of course the sparsely populated regions in which own POPs could probably never be operated economically with a limited number of subscribers.

From the perspective of fiber optic end customers and the medium to long-term future of the entire Swiss fiber optic network infrastructure, it seems to me to be extremely important not to turn the current option of optionally using the BBCS service offered by the private sector into a technological constraint for all other providers and customers.

A renewed infrastructure monopoly on the customer access lines, this time not on the copper lines, but simply “modernized” on the last “fiber-optic mile” of Swisscom, would affect the transmission technologies that Swisscom alone has determined and actively used and the end customer services that can be offered on them not only for Swisscom, but also for decades to come for all other providers and their customers.

In my opinion, the further expansion of the Swiss fiber optic network for the economy and our entire society for decades is simply too important to simply hand over sovereignty over it to a single private individual at the risk of further violations of competition law (which still have to be finally clarified in court). to be left to the provider.

If, contrary to expectations, Swisscom is now able to legally “swim its way out” of its currently “tiled” FTTH expansion situation, I would classify this as a pure “Pyrrhic victory” in the medium term, because should it actually succeed in establishing a renewed monopoly on the last mile As a consequence, the political demand for a state-run “Swiss Cyber ​​Grid” organized in the same way as electricity and water supplies would probably gain a lot of momentum.

This would then be finalized, accompanied by a renewed revision of the Telecommunications Act, probably with the transfer of all fiber optic networks that had already been built by private providers to a central pure network company.

Forecasts over the next few decades are of course always dependent on a lot of uncertainty, but since no one can actually be satisfied with the FTTH expansion situation in Switzerland at the moment, I find it all the more annoying that Parliament did so in the last FMG -Revision 2018 deliberately rejected, as suggested by the Federal Council at the time, the rules of the game for the future FTTH expansion directly in the Telecommunications Act and thereby opened the door to the current chaos and legal disputes.

Except in the period from August 31, 2000 to May 12, 2001 (absence on business in the States), no voting or elections were missed. I take my civic duties seriously.

The competitors filed a complaint and obtained an interim injunction.

The customer should be able to choose who carries out the last mile.

I would expect most people to stay with Swisscom. Who wants to organize a submission privately?

Why do I even use the keys in the forum?

In addition to my address, various other addresses (core area Steg in Tösstal) were checked beforehand. Had to/was allowed to determine that all checked addresses have fiber optic connections (last mile).

Only the six-bedroom property in which I am based did not have the last mile (to the power socket) implemented - the court ruling got in the way. That’s why I used the extreme wording in the other thread (why couldn’t this be done “under the table at relatively the same time as all the other addresses in the place of residence?”).