FTTP, FTTP on Demand, G.fast, Ultrafast

Apologies to those few who actually still read this blog, and being reasonable why would you, for the lack of updates.

Going to cover a few different things.

Openreach have started a trial in Haydon Wick, Swindon in the hope of deploying FTTP more quickly and cheaply. This is a combination of using the connectorised fibre solution tested in Huntingdon and placing rope into ducting to pull the fibre in advance. This has allowed delivery apparently considerably more quickly and at a far lower cost per premises passed.

Something really strange is why Openreach didn't use connectorised fibre in their original rollout but instead used far more expensive and time consuming fusion splicing resulting in installs as Think Broadband noted taking an entire day. This isn't new technology. Verizon were using it for FiOS installs in 2005.

Placing rope into ducts to pull cables in advance isn't a new thing, either. Virgin Media place rope into their swept tees ready to pull coaxial cable through from taps and this, too, has been used for FTTP in underground plant.

Apart from using an active fibre solution, which wouldn't have happened as it would've left the possibility that other operators could unbundle the fibre, I struggle to see how Openreach could've done their original tens of thousands of commercial FTTP premises more expensively. They ended up having to do a ton of work to build the initial networks due to interesting deployment area choices, have ended up asking for thousands in construction charges to connect some properties which begs the question of why they'd deployed there, and chose to use fusion splicing instead of cheaper connectorised throughout.

In many ways Openreach treated FTTP less like something that they could take mass market, and planned to, and more like each and every property was receiving a leased line. Strangely enough this worked out to be really time consuming and really expensive. Trying to avoid putting the tin foil hat on you find yourself wondering if they ever had any intention of deploying widely initially, instead wanting to prove to themselves it was infeasible, and now they've more commercial motivation they are increasingly using appropriate construction techniques.

FTTP on demand. I've given up on this one. My best laid plan has fallen through because the operator doesn't want to involve themselves in the product any more. The informed that it was awkward to order, the surveying process caused problems, the provisioning caused them problems, the way the product was built at a technical level caused them problems, it took way longer to provision than leased lines, and demand was so low due to the cost being so high. A 100Mb leased line, guaranteed bandwidth, guaranteed availability, would actually cost them and, in turn, me, less to provision than a best effort FTTPoD service with no SLA right up until about month 33, and wouldn't involve a 36 month contract so would be cheaper across the period I required it.

The ISP mentioned that initially the only thing about the FoD product that wasn't a nightmare was the price, and this was swiftly changed in early 2014 when the install price was increased by over 50% and the monthly rental charge to them considerably more than doubled from £38+VAT per month to £99+VAT per month.

With considerable irritation and a couple of rather upset comments to people in places of power I've given up any chance of a resilient solution through Openreach and made Starbucks and Costa my backups for working from home.

This leads on to G.fast and the Openreach ultrafast deployment plans.

Openreach have informed they plan to reach about 10 million premises in the UK with ultrafast broadband, likely heavily G.fast, by 2020. They could do this relatively simply by putting new G.fast kit next to their existing cabinets. No need to push fibre deeper into the network, no need to spend on FTTP. It would, however, mean that if you're further than 2-300 metres from the cabinet you're out of luck.

They have made noises about increasing the FTTP in their network and the trials they're doing seem to imply this, however it should be noted that much the same noises were heard a few years ago, and to date Openreach have built to less than 0.4% of the UK without outside funding. Less than 100,000 premises when excluding co-funded builds in Cornwall and around the country via BDUK.

We'll see. I hope to be pleasantly surprised but, based on past experiences, will keep an open if possibly cynical mind.

An area like this one is interesting. FTTC/superfast broadband uptake is very high here - of about 550 premises covered by our cabinet 500 have taken it. Which leads to the question of how Openreach decide where to deploy G.fast and/or FTTP. I'm interested to see if the very high FTTC uptake actually deters Openreach from further investment. From a cold, commercial perspective why spend money, even if it's a relatively small amount colocating G.fast next to the existing equipment, building ultrafast when superfast is selling so well?

I've been told one won't influence the other but, for obvious reasons, it's tricky to imagine it won't form part of the business case. Surely where Openreach are having their backsides kicked by Virgin Media or an alternative network they'll be far more inclined to spend to win customers back? Likewise why make even the relatively modest investment in FTTC redundant when it's bringing in a good amount of money and will pay for itself then turn a profit relatively soon?

Talking of Virgin Media I noted on a forum thread that I can't remember when there has been such a large difference between the top widely offered speeds between the two. Openreach only go above 76Mb in a tiny fraction of the UK while Virgin Media are offering 300Mb, which performs at around 320Mb, to nearly half the country.

The explanation is relatively simple - Openreach's customers have no interest in funding a speed war with Virgin Media. G.fast won't win it, with relatively modest expenditure Virgin could release services faster than the 500Mb G.fast is 'planned' to achieve by 2025, only FTTP would allow Openreach's customers to compete and their customers have no interest in paying for it. Two of the three largest Openreach customers don't offer FTTP via Openreach's existing services and constantly and loudly state their desire to pay less for the existing FTTC services.

There are a number of divides between areas in the UK and here, as in many other countries, a big one is between those who can get cable and those who cannot. The incumbent neither here or anywhere else has a pressing business case to change this with any kind of urgency.

Virgin Media are trolling me - home office broadband and moving

Walk out of my street and onto the road that serves ours to find this:

Virgin Media are going right past the entrance to our street on their way to properties across the road.

It'll be interesting to see what impact VM passing an area served by cabinet 82, albeit maybe 20-25% of the properties served by cabinet 82, has on the extremely high FTTC uptake here.

Predictably this work has caused complaints. This is, perhaps, something that Virgin Media are getting quite used to by now. Digging pavements is slow, expensive and, albeit briefly, disruptive.

I have been having some issues with my home office service's reliability and performance that make my desire for a backup that uses a different network all the stronger.

Less than half usual performance

A quote for FTTP on Demand not only gave a huge price but I was also told they weren't willing to progress the order due to my road's status.

For many reasons we've been considering a possible house move. Unavailability of alternative broadband options for my home office goes onto the list. It's nowhere near the top but has to go on there.

Over half of the UK has the choice of BT and another fixed line operator.

The vast majority have a choice of BT FTTC and either a >8Mb Openreach ADSL line, cable, wireless or 3G/4G. Sadly we aren't, and have no prospect of being, in that cohort.

FTTC is good enough for most purposes, is far cheaper and faster to deploy so made economic and business sense - I have no complaints about that solution being here. It'd be fine as a primary line for us if we had a backup solution however no cable, no worthwhile ADSL, no wireless and no 3G or 4G puts us almost back to the position we were in during the Fibre for Middleton campaign that saw BT deliver superfast broadband to us.

Maybe we should move to an FTTP-enabled rural village or hamlet; more FTTP serving houses in those than Leeds Central. In common with many other urban areas the fibre to premises in Leeds Central is all delivered to apartment buildings by Hyperoptic. FTTP is by far the most reliable broadband out there so if you can get it, do.

We're between rock and hard place, and while it seems as far as broadband goes the in thing is to complain relentlessly on forums and the comments section of ISP Review, the usual and more constructive solution is to get out from between that rock and hard place.

Update: I just had a local resident ask me when he could expect Virgin Media to cover his street. Had to tell him that if he was lucky it would be 2019. If unlucky never, and that it was extremely unlikely he would have better broadband options than the ones he has now, which are 1Mb if he's lucky or 40-60Mb depending on where in his street he is. 

This estate has a household income over 3 times that of the rest of the ward, and far more home businesses and home workers. Much of the estate will have broadband of at best 1/8th the performance of the rest of the ward and more likely 1/14th to 1/25th by 2019.

There's a digital divide.

Broadbad - Grant Shapps suddenly interested in broadband

Grant Shapps has led a group of 121 MPs in releasing a report called 'Broadbad' arguing for Openreach, the business unit of BT Group that manages the physical ducts in the ground, cables and exchanges, to be separated from the rest of the Group entirely.

It's discussed in this BBC article - BT should be forced to sell Openreach service, report says

The bottom of the article requests responses, and as a BT Openreach service user here's mine. This also outs me a bit but, hey, c'est la vie.

I have had other thoughts since about the impact this will have on the market, the unexpected side effects, BT's Retail arm being free to more aggressively pursue market share, and other things. The potential for unintended consequences is huge.

Follow the debate on ISPReview, ThinkBroadband and on Twitter via hashtag #Broadbad

BBC,

I have profound doubts about the BIG report and what they think the results of separation of Openreach will achieve.

I am in no way biased towards or have any reason to be a huge 'fan' of BT or Openreach. I'm the Carl Thomas mentioned here:

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2012/11/fibre-for-middleton-broadband-campaign-criticises-bt-viability-assessments.html

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2013/12/strong-uptake-street-cabinet-82-hunslet-finally-gets-fttc-battle.html

You guys have featured me discussing broadband locally on Look North.

My wife has featured on national television.

[Removed link to video for copyright reasons. It's from Super Scrimpers and I'm sure can be found online somewhere :)]

Competition didn't resolve the issues - Openreach did. Due to the asinine way in which our planning and adoption systems run competition couldn't resolve the issues even if it wanted to. Per the below link the estate I reside on is the only one in the area not seeing any competition.

http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/latest-news/top-stories/south-leeds-superfast-web-access-at-last-1-7299786

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2016/01/bad-news-for-bt-as-121-cross-party-uk-mps-call-for-openreach-split.html#comment-162565 illustrates some factual errors in the report. There are a number of others. This is not a serious report, it's politics to justify a pre-determined position. Using for example maps of amount of land mass covered by fixed line broadband is absurd. Obviously where there are no people there's no broadband. Using numbers of people not covered is also misleading. Broadband networks aren't provided to people they are built out to premises.

For all the talk of competition there is no clear indication of where it will come from, or why, apart from Virgin Media, no-one else has been investing.

Surely if Openreach were so poor, providing such abysmal services and failing their customers to such an extent, the door is more widely open to the competition, so where have they been? Mr Shapps is allegedly a huge fan of the open market and in his various online incarnations epitomises finding gaps in the market, regardless of whether they are providing legitimate value, and profiting from them.

TalkTalk don't have the money to invest - they are paying share dividends by borrowing.

Sky have had ample opportunity to invest but have only conducted small scale trials. They have made no commitments but deployed plenty of fibre to the press release.

Vodafone have run no trials to speak of, and again all fibre to the press release. Their work in the Republic of Ireland required co-operation with taxpayer funded electricity boards to use their infrastructure.

The one case I'm aware of where an infrastructure arm has been separated from the rest of the telecomms company there is indeed fibre to the premises being deployed, using taxpayer funding alongside a public private partnership. Such a thing cannot be done in the UK due to EU state aid regulations. Check out Chorus Ltd, New Zealand and their UFB network.

https://www.chorus.co.nz/ufb

Lastly, a separation of Openreach from BT Group results in Openreach being directly answerable to shareholders. Shareholders are going to want financial returns. Without the rest of BT Group's revenues relying on Openreach network upgrades there is less of a case for them to acquiesce to Openreach investment in infrastructure. There will be less funding for network builds and more attempts to maximise returns on the existing infrastructure.

I am not entirely sure what the political game Mr Shapps is playing is, or how he or others will or think they will benefit, but I don't foresee any way in which the inevitable years of turmoil will achieve any kind of positive result in the short term or medium term.

You can reach me at [Number removed] or [Number removed] if you wish to discuss further.

Kindest regards,

Carl