I have this unfortunate tendency to recognize my own writing. This is what was in an article about the tower levy in the Sunday Times, 26th of November 2017:
This was another reason for the government’s action to reduce the number of towers, he said.
The tower levy is unlikely to result in the quick consolidation of antennae to fewer towers because tower sharing is already happening and in most cases, mounting additional antennae on existing towers is not practically possible because of the weight they (or the underlying structures) have been designed to carry. The likely outcome is the shutting down of marginal towers, harming the quality of service in the cities and loss of service in some rural areas.
This what I had written under my name in the FT this past Monday, 20th of November 2017.
The tower levy is unlikely to result in the quick consolidation of antennae to fewer towers because tower sharing is already happening and in most cases, mounting additional antennae on existing towers is not practically possible because of the weight they (or the underlying structures) have been designed to carry. The likely outcome is the shutting down of marginal towers, harming the quality of service in the cities and loss of service in some rural areas.
My assumption is that the “he” referred to in the Sunday Times is me. The journalist just forgot to specify.
But anyway, it’s good that more people get to read what I wrote. The Sunday Times does have a big circulation.
More important, and even more satisfying would be if the government withdraws this ill-considered proposal, now that they’re getting the relevant information from all sources, including those I did not talk to.
Comments are closed.