BT to have free hand with fibre

Rik · Mar 03, 2009, 11:34:21

El Reg reports:

QuoteBT has convinced regulators to allow it to charge rivals whatever it wants for access to its forthcoming £1.5bn fibre network, following an intensive lobbying campaign.

Ofcom said today that BT Openreach will have to offer rivals equal access to the network, as it does to existing infrastructure, but price controls will be removed. "This will allow investors to make an appropriate return on their investment, based on the risk they are taking but pricing at a level that the market will bear," the regulator said.

It means Openreach will probably offer competitors the choice of reselling active wholesale products, or of installing their own equipment in exchanges. Ofcom said BT Retail must be treated without favour.

BT plans to spend £1.5bn on fibre by 2012. New build developments will get full fibre to the home (FTTH) access at "up to" 100Mbit/s. The rest of the cash will be spent on cheaper fibre to the cabinet (FTTC) deployments capable of speeds of "up to" 40Mbit/s.

In total, BT chief executive Ian Livingstone said today, the investment will connect "at least" 40 per cent of households to higher speed broadband by 2012.

Internet users in sparsely populated areas are most likely to miss out because broadband investments in such areas show a lower return. LLU providers apply such economic analysis to the current generation of broadband services by shunning rural exchanges.

I feel this is a good thing in the main, at least fibre will go ahead and market forces will determine pricing in time.

Simon · Mar 03, 2009, 11:35:15

We live in hope.

Rik · Mar 03, 2009, 11:40:52

I'd certainly pay a premium to get it.

Simon · Mar 03, 2009, 11:42:05

I'd have to see what benefits it would bring first. I can't really complain about my connection, on the whole.

Noreen · Mar 03, 2009, 11:44:28

Quote from: Rik on Mar 03, 2009, 11:40:52
I'd certainly pay a premium to get it.

Why, Rik?

quandam · Mar 03, 2009, 11:45:38

"Internet users in sparsely populated areas are most likely to miss out because broadband investments in such areas show a lower return."

We certainly will live in hope in the sunny Scottish Highlands

Never mind, suppose that's one of the penalties we have to put up with, 8)

Rik · Mar 03, 2009, 11:46:14

Quote from: Noreen on Mar 03, 2009, 11:44:28
Why, Rik?

Because, with the line speeds I have, many things are not really an option for me, eg iPlayer. If the extra speed was there, I could look at using my connection very differently.

Rik · Mar 03, 2009, 11:47:56

Quote from: quandam on Mar 03, 2009, 11:45:38
"Internet users in sparsely populated areas are most likely to miss out because broadband investments in such areas show a lower return."

We certainly will live in hope in the sunny Scottish Highlands Never mind, suppose that's one of the penalties we have to put up with, 8)

It depends how remote you are, of course. Inverness would be fine as would Aberdeen I suspect. Mind you, if I went home to Forres, I'd improve dramatically over my speeds here.

quandam · Mar 03, 2009, 12:11:57

Quote from: Rik on Mar 03, 2009, 11:47:56
It depends how remote you are, of course. Inverness would be fine as would Aberdeen I suspect. Mind you, if I went home to Forres, I'd improve dramatically over my speeds here.

You are quite right Rik, Aberdeen and Inverness, not a problem. Our exchange has around 1000 users so I would think the likes of Sky etc have very little interest in our internet 'plight'.

kinmel · Mar 03, 2009, 12:13:56

My hope is that once again the Welsh Assembly will bribe BT to roll out FTTC into urban areas that would not otherwise be in the first tranche of exchanges.

Rik · Mar 03, 2009, 12:17:17

In some ways, Scotland and Wales are better placed than rural England, Alan.

Rik · Mar 03, 2009, 12:18:21

Quote from: quandam on Mar 03, 2009, 12:11:57
You are quite right Rik, Aberdeen and Inverness, not a problem. Our exchange has around 1000 users so I would think the likes of Sky etc have very little interest in our internet 'plight'.

Sadly, you're right. OTOH, even living in Milton Keynes, most people get services around 2Mbps due to the aluminium cabling prevalent here.

quandam · Mar 03, 2009, 12:18:41

Quote from: kinmel on Mar 03, 2009, 12:13:56
My hope is that once again the Welsh Assembly will bribe BT to roll out FTTC into urban areas that would not otherwise be in the first tranche of exchanges.

If they do, could you get them to show the Scottish Parliament how to achieve it!

john · Mar 03, 2009, 12:52:03

Quote....but pricing at a level that the market will bear," the regulator said.

That's the problem with the UK (but probably most other places too), prices are usually determined by what they can persuade sufficent numbers of people to pay, which is often much higher than what it costs to provide plus a 'reasonable' profit.

Sebby · Mar 03, 2009, 13:57:57

Quote from: Simon on Mar 03, 2009, 11:42:05
I'd have to see what benefits it would bring first. I can't really complain about my connection, on the whole.

It would mean an end to distance from the exchange being an issue.

davej99 · Mar 03, 2009, 14:25:28

I read last year that the cost of deploying mass fibre to the home in the US is $333 and $500 (around £300) in the UK. I would pay that. Openreach suddenly moves from being the Copper Clown to the Connectivity King; the gatekeeper of communications and media convergence; the must have business parter. So it is surely time to take Openreach away from BT and run it like the electricity and gas grids, severed at the utilities' point of supply.

If you then consider that several fibres go in almost as cheaply as one, the implication of this announcement is quite profound. Competing parallel national networks to the cabinet and to the home become a real possibility. The role of government and regulation here is to mandate the necessary multiple dark fibre and destroy the last mile monopoly for ever. Oh, and mandate that rural Britain gets connected too. Even if our layers of government chuck in a bit of dosh saved from ..... insert personal prejudice of choice. (Anyone want to join my "Broadband not Gaelic Roadsigns" campaign?)

Rik · Mar 03, 2009, 15:35:11

Sign me up, Dave.

kinmel · Mar 03, 2009, 16:03:16

Quote from: quandam on Mar 03, 2009, 12:18:41
If they do, could you get them to show the Scottish Parliament how to achieve it!

The Welsh Assembly ( being a plastic Parliament rather than the real thing ) always think they are the underdog and so spend England's money to keep up with the rest of the U.K.

They have just spent £29million on a fibre backhaul that will in fact serve very few companies that actually need that sort of connectivity. The area was also amongst the first in the U.K. to have SDSL available.

netn00b · Mar 05, 2009, 08:45:42

i'm also hoping this is a good thing.

i'd pay some sort of one off fee for the chance to have fibre to my house rather than the exchange which is circa 3 miles away

i at the stage of wondering if LLU would improve my connection any.

Rik · Mar 05, 2009, 09:57:08

What are your current stats?

DarkStar · Mar 05, 2009, 12:55:01

Most people seem to be missing this quote in the original release:

"In total, BT chief executive Ian Livingstone said today, the investment will connect "at least" 40 per cent of households to higher speed broadband by 2012."

That 40% almost certainly accounts for most of those households in large towns and cities that already get 5/6 MB download speeds, those of us on long lines out in the sticks struggling to get near 2MB will never see this unless BT are made to supply FTTC outside of densely populated areas. Also, my understanding from what I read somewhere is that the transfer speed will deteriorate rapidly between the Cabinet and the household, if you are say 1km from the cabinet you will not see a great improvement. For those in the countryside I don't think it's going to happen.

Rik · Mar 05, 2009, 13:07:36

It's not, Ian. I can only hope that we'll get it here, as the shift from aluminium would see huge improvements.