Three pieces of news have reawakened the debate on the so-called "pole of the towers", a topic of great interest throughout the national and European broadcasting and TLC perimeter. The first concerned the recent Cellnex agreement for the acquisition of over 10 towers in France, Italy, and Switzerland. This is a deal worth around 1,4 billion and which first of all saw the interest of the Iliad group (over 5700 towers in France and over 2000 in Italy) and then the Swiss operator Salt (for the purchase of 90% of the property and about 700 towers). The second piece of news that is going almost unnoticed, despite the significant impact, refers to the fact that from 3 June, Swiss public television will no longer broadcast on digital terrestrial (DVB-T) and therefore the more than 200 antennas will be switched off and the relative towers decommissioned.
Finally, the third news concerns the publication of a report signed by EY and European Wireless Infrastructure Association (EWIA) where it is argued, in summary, that the processes of aggregation of wireless infrastructure suppliers in Europe can give rise to a thriving M&A market. These dynamics, according to the report, could free up resources estimated at around 28 billion euros over the next ten years, which operators can reinvest in network efficiency in order to improve local coverage and boost the development of 5G.
Four years after Rai Way's listing on the Stock Exchange and the recent delisting of Ei Towers, the picture of what would be a major industrial policy project to the full benefit of the country's system is starting to become slightly clearer. First of all, it is clear that it will be necessary to distinguish two distinct “poles” of towers. On the one hand those involved in the diffusion of radio and television signals (broadcast) and on the other those relating to the diffusion of the wireless network (broadband). Antennas with different purposes can also coexist on the same pylons and therefore the "tower" can also be the same. The approach, and therefore the costs, related to management and maintenance is radically changing. Furthermore, the so-called "high-altitude towers" mainly intended for broadcasting, as we have written several times, are destined for a slow and inexorable technological decline.
We had already written about it on these pages a few years ago: the theme of transmission towers is followed carefully by first online for some time (the first article appeared in February 2017) trying to understand the dynamics and prospects of a sector of great interest for the national economy. The title at the time was "TV, the end of digital terrestrial has begun. Here are the new scenarios also for the towers”. It wasn't difficult to imagine what future was being drawn following both the application of the Community directives on the reallocation of frequencies around 700 Mhz and the diffusion of new models of production and distribution of audiovisual products increasingly usable on platforms other than the traditional ether.
The World Radiocommunication Conference 2019 (WRC-19) is scheduled for next September where the agenda for the next conference in 2023 will be drawn up for the subsequent and progressive divestment of the frequencies used by digital terrestrial. It is estimated that the dismantling times of the broadcast towers could be around 10 years, a period which, at least from a financial point of view, is considered long enough to guarantee substantial revenues against relatively low investments.
Quite another sign, however, as regards land broadband towers which precisely by virtue of an upcoming and rapid development process of 5G and the complex of the digital market will be increasingly precious and, in this context, it still makes industrial sense to speak of a "pole of towers" even if combined with the broadband network next generation. It is therefore a process of aggregation and concentration that allows system efficiency, cost reduction and greater coverage of the territory. From this point of view, the cited report has good reason to argue that the "pole of the towers" is useful and convenient.
On the contrary instead, apparently, for the broadcast towers which, although generic declarations of interest are occasionally read, in reality they don't seem to be of much interest. To put it bluntly, there could and should be attention in this sense: in fact what logic is evident in a redundant, expensive and inefficient system like the current one which sees a duplicated and fragmented network? Mediaset, as well as to raise cash, had good sense to divest its assets of Ei Towers (now in the F2I galaxy) and make possible the birth of the "first independent Italian operator of telecommunications towers".
Also for Rai there could, and perhaps there should, be convenience to evaluate other perspectives for its listed Rai Way with two hypotheses: the first with a correct cost analysis (it currently pays over 180 million Euros a year) and pondering the possibility of turning to the market, for a not so extreme hypothesis, to F2I itself (the law allows it, it does not oblige Rai to use of Via Teulada) where it could achieve substantial savings. Another way, in the given conditions, with respect to an accurate evaluation of the cost-benefits, referring first of all to current revenues, of follow the same path as Mediaset and also hypothesize a delisting of the listed company.
From now on, when we speak of the "pole of the towers" it will be necessary to carefully distinguish which towers we are referring to. They are two worlds close, but they speak different languages.
The author of the article who proposes that Rai abandon Rai Way to its fate is sympathetic…