Industries · Telecommunications

Telecommunications

A carrier has fibre in ducts of unknown age, towers with inspection reports in PDFs, and a capex process that funds growth easily and renewal reluctantly.

Who this is for

Three people, one budget argument

👷

Network asset manager

Owns the plan and answers for it. Everything on screen is built to make that week easier.

💷

Field operations lead

Holds the budget line and carries the valuation. Cares about defensibility before features.

🏛️

CTO

Signs, and is the one asked the awkward question in public. Needs one page, not a tour.

Asset classes

What AIPP scores in this industry

Telecom Fibre Telecom Duct Pit Telecom Towers Telecom Active Telecom Facility Power
📐

Configured for this industry out of the box: condition on the IIMM_1_5 scale, the TELECOM weighting profile, budget shown as Renewal capex envelope, and the instruments it answers to (ITU_G652, ITU_L_SERIES, TIA222) named on every score. All of it is yours to change — the weights are sliders, not our opinion.

The honest bit

6 of 30 assets will not score

That is the demo register for this industry, and the gaps are deliberate. AIPP refuses to rank an asset the evidence does not support — it will not apply a curve, a zero or a middle grade to a thing nobody has inspected. 20% of this register comes back unranked, with the reason named.

6 of 30 assets carry NO condition evidence and NO age. That is deliberate. A demo register where everything scores teaches a prospect nothing about what happens to the two-thirds of their own register that will not — and it is exactly where most tools quietly invent a zero. Open the demo on these.

How it runs

From export to defensible programme

01

Fibre loads by route with its attenuation trend; towers load with structural class and inspection date.

02

Service continuity carries the highest weight — for a carrier, service IS the product.

03

Single-path routes rank above redundant ones at equal condition, which condition-based ranking never captures.

04

The envelope constrains, and the plan reports the availability each tranche protects.

05

The pack frames renewal in outage-minutes rather than asset counts, because that is what the board funds.

What you will see

The screens that matter here

Redundancy changes the answerThese two routes are in identical condition. One is protected, one is not. The unprotected one ranks eleven places higher, and that is the whole argument.
Towers you cannot see intoThese towers have inspection reports in PDFs nobody has extracted. They are unscored, not assumed healthy — and their replacement value is the business case for the extraction project.
Renewal in the board's languageRenewal capex loses to growth capex because it is argued in assets. Argue it in availability and it competes properly.
The planAnd the constrained programme, with what does not fit named.
ProvenanceEvery number opens. Nothing here asks for trust it has not earned.

Fair questions

What this industry actually asks us

Our OSS already knows the network.

It knows the topology and the alarms. It does not rank renewal against a budget or produce the defence.

Fibre does not really age.

The glass does not; the duct, the splice enclosures and the pit lids do. Those are separate classes here for exactly that reason.

Is TIA-222 implemented?

Referenced. Structural class and inspection regime are carried as content; no structural analysis is performed.

Run it on your own worst class

Bring one export — the class with the missing condition data and the costs from 2019. If AIPP tells you the truth about it in twenty minutes, that is worth a conversation. If it scores everything and looks clean, tell us so.