Fibre available? - Opinions differ

[#1]

@Rhyn Heh!

I suppose so, but all I really wanted was a way of improving on the 1mbps upload speed on Plusnet ADSL for the occasional urgent upload of video files, and noticed that their FTTC offering would have done that. Now it seems it's put up with 18down/1up, or go full-fat FTTP, get silly download speeds, but (according to the sites of the ISPs listed here https://www.openreach.com/fibre-broadband/fttp-providers) shell out a fair old wodge of money that it's hard to justify.

[#2]

As @bmc  stated in an earlier post, I also have read somewhere that if you go to say BT and sign up for their 40/10 package  then if FTTC is not available at your address they will connect you to this service over FTTP at the FTTC price.

It will cost you nothing to ring them and ask.

[#3]

@lowden 

The OpenReach site hasn't been updated with new providers for a while - that's why I mentioned Aquiss before. There will almost certainly be other (smaller) providers who provide a service.

When thinking about FTTP you need to consider if you need a phone line (as it's not required for internet). You also need to remember that it FTTC would (probably) cost at least £5pm more than what you pay PlusNet for ADSL.

With that in mind I had a look at Zen Internet. They appear to have a 38/10 package for £29.99 with a phone line but only £19.99 without the phone. You also get a well thought of router (FritzBox 7530).

If you don't need a phone then I suspect £19.99 is in the range for what you pay now never mind the additional (I believe) £5 that FTTC would have cost.

If you need a phone how does £29.99 compare to what you currently pay (+the £5 FTTC premium).

Brian

[#4]

@lowden 

Ok, got it wrong with my last post. Totally wrong. I ran my address through their checker (I have FTTP) and it came up with a different price list.

Zen 38/10 FTTP is £42 without phone and £43.99 with phone.

Brian

[#5]

@bmc That doesn't sound as bad as I thought, price-wise. It's an odd situation from a sales/marketing position, this FTTP business. If as suggested above, once FTTP is there, FTTC won't be, then every FTTP deployment is, to providers like Plusnet, a block on upselling, since they won't market a product.

No-one else has been pestering my street to get us to abandon ADSL and take up the FTTP we have. I suppose only BT would have the promotional muscle, so it just sits there. I think (thanks to this thread) I'm the only person in a 3 mile radius who's given it a moment's thought.

[#6]

I suspect that Plusnet's masters will not allow Plusnet to introduce a FTTP product until there are more budget providers around making an impact. In the meantime they are leaving this part of the market to the more profitable BT retail.

Remember, Plusnet are not their own masters when it comes to such issues.

[#7]

@lowden 

Don't know if you saw my last entry before you posted - that might change your opinion. In this case it also disproves my thought that, in general, ISP's are charging the same for FTTC & FTTP packages.

Aquiss appear to be £32pm for 38/10 (no phone) with £100 up front and you need to buy your own router.

It costs money for an ISP to set up their systems to run FTTP connections so it becomes a commercial decision as to when or if to offer a service. Until recently when OR ramped up their FTTP network install it was (and still is in some respects) a niche product.

When PlusNet closed their Trial to new applicants I believed it was only a matter of time until they announced a commercial product but there may be a grain of truth in the argument that they won't do so for a while as their parent company wouldn't want them to offer a "value" package against BT's premium offerings.

I knew that FTTP was available for my property as the underground chamber that serves my house is about 3m from my front door. I was able to chat to the engineers about it and knew when the circuit had passed testing and was ready for commissioning. However, it was well over a year later that OR sent a post card to the street informing them of availability.

Brian

[#8]

@bmc 

they won't do so for a while as their parent company wouldn't want them to offer a "value" package against BT's premium offerings.

That's the problem for ordinary Joe's like me. By ruling out a mid-priced FTTC offering where FTTP exists while retaining premium pricing, we the majority are not actually going to take up fibre until FTTP isn't premium any more, and the minority of speed freaks who aren't price sensitive will just get rinsed for as long as they can take it.

It's like banning Fords and only allowing bikes and Lagondas.

[#9]

@lowden 

FTTC costs money to install (like FTTP). However, it also has many technical problems related to distance - the further you are from a cabinet the lower the speed you can get. As your phone line didn't have a commercial FTTC install done previously then it can only be assumed that either FTTC wasn't viable from a technical point of view or from a commercial prospective.

My area got FTTP because for technical reasons due to how the phone lines were installed over 20 years ago - the technology used was incompatible with FTTC.

Like it or not OpenReach are entitled to a return on investment. Even with government funding many areas were / are not  feasible for FTTC.

FTTP costs far more to install but at least has no limits on speed no matter where you live. Once again OR are entitled to a return on investment and have to charge commercially - if they don't alternative fibre providers complain. I had a look at BT Wholesale pricing (what BT and all other providers pay for the OR network). As far as I can make out the FTTP cost per connection per annum is significantly more than a FTTC line.

Brian

[#10]

I take your point about installation costs and return on investment, but the history of communication technology - ever since the original invention of the Penny Post right up to Net Neutrality - has proved that the best way to drive uptake and maximise the benefits of a new medium is to flatten the cost of participation and spread the impacts, positive and negative.

[#11]

---

@lowden wrote:

I take your point about installation costs and return on investment, but the history of communication technology - ever since the original invention of the Penny Post right up to Net Neutrality - has proved that the best way to drive uptake and maximise the benefits of a new medium is to flatten the cost of participation and spread the impacts, positive and negative.

---

This is undoubtedly true but there comes a time for all technology when it reaches the end of its practical life.  For the BT copper based network that time is now!  OK, so newer bits of technology like FTTC, Gfast and others have successfully extended both the life and the performance in recent years, but the advertised performance is only available at increasingly shorter distances from the cabinet.

The OpenReach plan is to gracefully retire most of their copper network by 2025 - and it is in progress.  Of course, completing this mammoth task nationwide will inevitably take much longer (2035 is being touted).

In our rural backwater of 5 villages ( a Bermuda triangle midway between Cambridge and London) is scheduled to migrate to full fibre over the next two years as the more cost effective route to overall service improvement.

See here for a reasonable report.