|
市場調查報告書
新一代網路架構:實際狀況及移轉時期
Next-Generation Network Architecture: what and when?
|
新一代網路架構:實際狀況及移轉時期 是由出版商Analysys Mason在2008年01月所出版的。
這份英文市場調查報告書價格從美金3600起跳。
在銷售業績不佳、核心服務的吸引力降低的情況下,通訊業者正著手朝新一代網路(NGN)發展。移轉的主要動機是為了維持核心事業合理化以達到降低成本的目的並確保IP網路帶來的商機,但為了減輕隨著事業移轉遇到的法律規範面負擔並使資產得以轉換,產業整體都可能受到極大的影響。
本報告書內容包括:朝NGN核心事業完全移轉(BT等)、核心事業維持現狀同時投資新一代連線(NGA)(Deutsche Telekom等)、以NGA及NAN同時實現為目標的完全IP策略(KPN等)等3種NGN投資策略介紹、利用投 資收益(ROI)模式的各種市場環境及規範環境面的有效性分析等。內容綱要摘記如下:
摘要
第1章 雖然往NGN發展,但結果不明確
- 網路轉型的相關3種基本策略
- 許多既有業者選擇朝NGN發展的3個理由
- 部份業者發展網路工程再造的強烈動機
- 以巨額投資、不受規範限制的形式企圖支配市場的業者
第2章 網路標準原價下調及帶來變化的NGN
- NGN的資本成本超過NGA
- 集中發展網路事業能降低現金原會,但可能不會減少資本支出
- 實質成本降低效果不在長期計畫之內
- 朝NGN發展將使業者的資產結構產生變化
第3章 NGN業者的新收益規模值得存疑
- 顯示各種NGN投資策略的收益來源組合及相互關係
- 基本費用下調對固定語音服務的單價造成不良影響
- 針對一般住家的IP電視市場雖然有所成長,但通訊業者零售市場的收益增加有限
- 針對中小企業的管理服務收益增加也有限
- 值得信賴的銷售企業在針對企業的IT服務領域的收益增加
- 擁有巨大發展潛力的批發事業領域
- 違反最近趨勢的NGN的集中服務
第4章 法律規範加強使NGN業者的利益減少
- 與NGA相關的問題檯面化
- 互連費用下調,使得其他競爭企業坐收節省NGN成本之利
- 結構與功能分割產生的新問題
- 靭性強的產業別整合模式
第5章 NGN投資勝於NGA投資
- NGN可能可以節省成本,但若為增加商業服務的收益,還需要發展重點事業
- 單純依靠NGA的策略能確保未來發展性低的市場佔有率
- 光纖是終極目標,但優先課題還是核心事業的轉換
行動
圖表
Abstract
“The rise of NGNs and NGAs, coupled with the vogue for separation of
bottleneck physical assets, raises a fundamental long-term question for
operators: “Where do operators want their principal assets to
be?”” Rupert Wood, Principal Analyst
Given their stagnating revenue and the decline in their core service
propositions, most incumbent operators are embarking on next-generation
network (NGN) transformations. The principal reasons that operators give for
this investment are the requirements to cut costs by rationalising core
businesses and to re-engineer to better take advantage of the opportunities
presented by pervasive IP networking. NGN roll-outs also represent a way for
incumbents to reduce their burden of regulation and to transform their asset
bases; both these outcomes could have broader implications for the industry.
This report examines the relative merits of the three main approaches to NGN
investment: a move to a full NGN core (such as that being carried out by BT),
investment in next-generation access (NGA) with a core overlay (like that by
Deutsche Telekom), and a full-IP strategy of rolling out NGA and NGN at the
same time (like that of KPN). Using a return on investment (ROI) model, the
report identifies critical dependencies and assesses the ability of each
strategy to attain the desired outcomes of cost saving and revenue enablement,
given different market and regulatory environments.
Next-Generation Network Architecture: what and when? answers your key questions:
- What are the key dependencies and critical success factors for the
different NGN strategies?
- What are the potential benefits of these strategies, in terms of cost
transformation, and how time-dependent are they?
- Is there sufficient demand for centralised services?
- What are the regulatory issues associated with NGNs?
- How much leverage can incumbents expect to exert on regulatory authorities?
- What are the long-term implications of NGNs for the market structure?
Who should read this report
- Incumbent operators: identify critical dependencies in the
formulation and implementation of NGN strategies.
- Alternative operators: understand the implications for the altnet
sector of incumbents' strategies.
- Non-facilities-based service providers: in a changing landscape,
identify market opportunities and formulate the best strategies to address
them.
- Media, IT and consumer-electronics companies: develop a view of the
way the telecoms landscape is changing and of how different strategies will
influence the value chain.
- Policy makers and regulators: gain insight into how different NGN
strategies can affect the competitive situation of the main groups of players.
- Investors and analysts: understand how different NGN strategies
will affect the long-term prospects of the major players in the market.
- Mobile operators: understand probable developments in the fixed
retail and wholesale markets and how they could affect the mobile business.
Table of Contents
0. Summary
1. NGN upgrades are underway, but outcomes are uncertain
- 1.1 There are three basic approaches to network transformation
- 1.2 Most incumbent operators have three explicit reasons for NGNs
- 1.3 Some incumbent operators have a stronger incentive to re-engineer than
others
- 1.4 Operators hope that heavy investment will deliver less heavily
regulated forms of market dominance
2. NGNs both reduce and transform the network cost base
- 2.1 The capital cost of an NGN can be substantially higher than that of
next-generation access
- 2.2 A single network will result in lower cash costs, but not necessarily
lower capex
- 2.3 Real cost savings are often out of line with long-term plans
- 2.4 NGNs transform the asset structure of operators
3. Serious doubts remain over the scale of the new revenue for NGN operators
- 3.1 Different approaches to NGN investment reveal different revenue mixes
and different co-dependencies
- 3.2 Lower underlying costs may damage the unit value of fixed voice
- 3.3 IPTV may take off in the residential market, but revenue opportunities
for telcos' retail arms may still be limited
- 3.4 Demand for managed services from SMEs is likely to bring limited
revenue growth
- 3.5 Networked enterprise IT offers revenue growth for players with scale
and credibility
- 3.6 Opportunities for wholesale divisions may be much greater
- 3.7 NGN' s centralised service delivery runs counter to recent trends
4. Regulation threatens the benefits to incumbents of NGNs
- 4.1 A set of increasingly familiar problems surrounds NGAs
- 4.2 Operators may have to hand on NGN cost savings to competitors, in the
form of lower interconnect charges
- 4.3 Structural and functional separation raise further complications
- 4.4 The vertically integrated model persists
5. NGNs are a better investment than NGAs
- 5.1 NGNs reduce costs, but growth in business services revenue requires
focused execution
- 5.2 NGA-only approaches are focused too closely on defending a share of a
low-opportunity market
- 5.3 Fibre is the ultimate goal, but core transformation is the priority
Actions
Companies discussed in this report:
AT&T, BT, Deutsche Telekom, eircom, France Telecom, KPN, Slovak Telecom,
Telecom Italia, Telstra, Verizon.
List of Figures and Tables
- Figure 1.1: IP MPLS overlay for fixed voice (partial PSTN replacement):
before and after
- Figure 1.2: Fixed network evolution: current situation and strategy of
selected incumbent operators
- Figure 1.3: Simplified overview of legacy overlays
- Figure 1.4: Simplified overview of BT' s 21CN switching and transmission
- Figure 1.5: Simplified overview of Deutsche Telekom' s FTTN network
- Figure 1.6: Simplified overview of KPN' s next-generation switching and
transmission
- Figure 1.7: Average spend per minute and volume of voice calls on fixed
and mobile networks in Western Europe
- Figure 1.8: Major European incumbents' exposure to fixed voice
- Figure 1.9: Operating margins of retail fixed divisions of major European
incumbent operators
- Figure 2.1: FTEs in BT Group, by division, FY2003/4 and FY2006/7
- Figure 2.2: Fixed switched voice volume as a proportion of total fixed and
mobile switched voice
- Table 3.1: Revenue impact of different next-generation scenarios
- Figure 3.1: A typical NGN service-delivery architecture
- Figure 5.1: Key financial outcomes of an NGN-only implementation
- Figure 5.2: Main revenue streams from an NGN-only implementation
- Figure 5.3: Key financial outcomes of an NGN-only implementation for an
operator with lower IT revenue
- Figure 5.4: Key financial outcomes of an NGA-only implementation
- Figure 5.5: Main revenue streams from an NGA-only implementation
- Figure 5.6: Key financial outcomes of an NGA-plus-NGN implementation
- Figure 5.7: Main revenue streams from an NGA-plus-NGN implementation
- Figure 5.8: Key financial outcomes of an NGA-plus-NGN implementation in
which the NGN element is delayed until Year 4
|