🇦🇺Australia

Überdimensionierung von Netzkapazitäten durch ungenaue Prognosen

4 verified sources

Definition

Australian operators dimension mobile and transmission networks using long‑term traffic growth forecasts and infrastructure planning models, including tools promoted by ACMA for site and spectrum forecasting.[3] Where forecasts are manually tuned or politically biased towards ‘headroom’, networks regularly end up with cell sites, microwave links, dark fibre cores and IP ports that sit under‑utilised for many years. The Ergon business case for telecommunications network capacity highlights that different upgrade strategies have materially different Net Present Value, with even the best option still showing a negative NPV of -$10.9 million, illustrating how mistimed or over‑built capacity erodes financial returns.[2] Industry reports show Australian telecom capex in the billions annually,[7][10] and experience from infrastructure planning indicates that 5–10 % overbuild arising from conservative or inaccurate forecasting is common in capital‑intensive networks. Applied to mobile RAN and backhaul capex of, for example, AUD 500–1,000 million over a planning period per major operator, this translates into AUD 25–100 million of capital tied up in capacity that is not required on the assumed timeline. The financial bleed is two‑fold: (1) excess depreciation and cost of capital on unused assets, and (2) opportunity cost where those funds could have been deployed into better‑yielding projects. Because procurement contracts for spectrum, towers, backhaul and data centre capacity are often multi‑year and non‑cancellable, mis‑forecasting locks carriers into fixed costs that are difficult to unwind.

Key Findings

  • Financial Impact: Schätzweise 5–10 % Über‑Capex auf capacity‑bezogene Investitionen; bei AUD 500–1.000 Mio. RAN/Backhaul‑Capex je großer Betreiber entspricht dies rund AUD 25–100 Mio. gebundenem Kapital pro 3–5‑Jahres‑Periode bzw. 10–30 Mio. p.a. an zusätzlicher Abschreibung/Kapitalkosten.
  • Frequency: Strukturell wiederkehrend bei jedem mehrjährigen Planungszyklus (alle 3–5 Jahre) und bei Zwischen‑Tranche‑Investments (jährlich).
  • Root Cause: Manuelle oder vereinfachte Traffic‑Prognosen; fehlende integrierte Modelle, die Marketing‑, Spektrums‑, Technologie‑ und Finanzdaten verbinden; Anreiz, Überlastung zu vermeiden, wodurch systematisch Puffer eingeplant werden; unzureichende Post‑Investment‑Reviews, die Fehlprognosen quantifizieren.

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Telecommunications carriers in Australia 🇦🇺 waste geschätzt AUD 10–30 Mio. pro Jahr je Betreiber auf überdimensionierte Funk‑ und Transportkapazität. Automation of network‑level demand forecasting, scenario modelling and procurement governance can cut 10–20 % of avoidable capex on low‑utilisation sites and links.

Affected Stakeholders

Chief Technology Officer (CTO), Head of Network Planning, Head of Procurement, Network Finance / Capex Controller, Radio Access Network Engineering Manager, Transmission Planning Manager

Deep Analysis (Premium)

Financial Impact

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Current Workarounds

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Get Solutions for This Problem

Full report with actionable solutions

$99$39
  • Solutions for this specific pain
  • Solutions for all 15 industry pains
  • Where to find first clients
  • Pricing & launch costs
Get Solutions Report

Methodology & Sources

Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.

Evidence Sources:

Related Business Risks

Request Deep Analysis

🇦🇺 Be first to access this market's intelligence