General Discussion
  >> Fibre Broadband


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User adslmax
(fountain of knowledge) Fri 28-Sep-12 22:38:55
Print Post

Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[link to this post]
 
I just got email from Openreach and explained why is my telephone exchange isn't FTTC choice yet and I can't believe what it say below:

On 28 September 2012 16:55, <nga.enquiries@openreach.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Mr ********

Thank you for your communication to NGA enquiries about the availability of Fibre Broadband at Cuckoo Oak exchange.

I am extremely sorry to inform you, that the upgrade of Cuckoo Oak exchange at this time, falls outside of our current upgrade footprint.

However, the Welsh government has announced plans to roll out fibre broadband as part of its own initiative.

This is being rolled-out with Openreach, and all enquiries must go to the Welsh government.

In the coming weeks and months a help-line will be set up for Welsh resident enquiries. In the meantime,

Information about the project can be obtained from the Welsh Government web-site.

http://wales.gov.uk/topics/businessa.../ngbw/?lang=en





Regards

Peter Wilde

N.I. Customer engagement

Email nga.enquireies@openreach.co.uk

And I had reply to him below:

Dear Peter,

Cuckoo Oak is NOT in Wales. It in Shropshire (Telford & Wrekin Council) in West Midlands but why is Dawley and Stirchley (3 miles away from Cuckoo Oak) is already enabled. Doesn't make any sense to me. There is also other area in Telford had FTTC are: Donnington, Newport, Oakengates, and Wellington.

Regards

Mr ********


So, what u think folks ? It so annoying and very disappointed.

plusnetADSL2+15 Meg
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Fri 28-Sep-12 23:03:23
Print Post

Re: Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[re: adslmax] [link to this post]
 
May be he is using the iPhone 5 Map App smile On a more serious note uncomprehensible!
Standard User adslmax
(fountain of knowledge) Fri 28-Sep-12 23:09:38
Print Post

Re: Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
lol, he probably is! smile

plusnetADSL2+15 Meg


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Fri 28-Sep-12 23:40:50
Print Post

Re: Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[re: adslmax] [link to this post]
 
Why should you be in the 2/3rds? What is special about that area compared to another area?
Some would suggest the presence of Virgin Media in the area means no real need to rush to provide FTTC

The country error does seem very bad, a polite reply pointing out the error, rather than a rant might be an idea

Andrew Ferguson, andrew@thinkbroadband.com
www.thinkbroadband.com - formerly known as ADSLguide.org.uk
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User adslmax
(fountain of knowledge) Fri 28-Sep-12 23:54:11
Print Post

Re: Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
Mr Saffron,

I appreciate your comments, and I am sure that you already have FTTC in your area. However, in MY area, the Virgin Media connectivity is an absolute joke, with so many drop-offs and disconnections (I've lost so many counts and lost count of how many phone calls to Virgin Media engineers, too). Which is why I think it is appropriate to "complain" that OpenReach isn't even considering Cuckoo Oak, when its neighbouring exchange, Dawley & Stirchley, gets the benefits? Geographically (number of houses per sq.mile), we're very similiar. I left virgin media to join plusnet on ADSL2+ at present, waiting for FTTC,

Regards

Adslmax

Eg:

Cuckoo Oak had more connection than Dawley exchange:

Dawley: Serves (approx): 6,965 residential premises
270 non-residential premises http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/WNDAW

Cuckoo Oak: Serves (approx): 7,431 residential premises
459 non-residential premises http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/WNCKO

Can you explain that anamoly, Mr. Saffron?

plusnetADSL2+15 Meg

Edited by adslmax (Sat 29-Sep-12 00:06:07)

Standard User MCM
(fountain of knowledge) Sat 29-Sep-12 01:19:28
Print Post

Re: Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[re: adslmax] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by adslmax:
Can you explain that anamoly, Mr. Saffron?
It would appear that BT don't consider Cuckoo Oak to be currently commercially viable. Is that so hard to understand? You complain yet you have access to VM which is more than many others users.

Many, including many thousands on much larger exchanges than yourself, have access to neither VM nor BT's FTTC/FTTP. For example, I'm on the Vauxhall exchange in central London, 22,750 residential premises, yet I have no access to either VM or FTTC/FTTP. The reason? Despite being over 2km from the exchange all of the lines on my late 1980s development are Exchange Only and with 75 units the development is too small for BT to consider installing a local PCP cab and an FTTC twin.
Standard User ccxo
(experienced) Sat 29-Sep-12 02:11:10
Print Post

Re: Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[re: adslmax] [link to this post]
 
Looking at the wider area- Openreach are enabling 2 exchanges for FTTC near Telford for 2013- Openreach also has 3 exchanges its enabling in Wolverhampton- with a further 5 with 2013 dates.

Once that work has been completed it will leave 2 exchanges left in Telford that are not currently part of the rollout- Cuckoo Oak being one of them, just have to wait till Openreach announce the next set of exchanges- they cannot be everywhere at once.

My Broadband Speed Test
Standard User WWWombat
(experienced) Sat 29-Sep-12 14:09:37
Print Post

Re: Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[re: adslmax] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by adslmax:
Which is why I think it is appropriate to "complain" that OpenReach isn't even considering Cuckoo Oak, when its neighbouring exchange, Dawley & Stirchley, gets the benefits? Geographically (number of houses per sq.mile), we're very similiar.

Eg:

Cuckoo Oak had more connection than Dawley exchange:

Dawley: Serves (approx): 6,965 residential premises
270 non-residential premises http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/WNDAW

Cuckoo Oak: Serves (approx): 7,431 residential premises
459 non-residential premises http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/WNCKO

Can you explain that anamoly, Mr. Saffron?

As others have said - some exchanges have been determined as viable, others not (and the same at individual cabinet level).

When this happens, there will be neighbouring exchanges in *exactly* your situation - where one is converted, and the other is not. It might be a fair question to ask Why, but not necessarily to rant about. It will happen *everywhere*.

In terms of numbers, you might be similar. Geographically, you might be similar. Or perhaps Dawley has a split between dense & sparse areas, while you are more evenly spread. Topographically, you might be dissimilar. Demographically, you might be dissimilar - perhaps they predict a smaller take-up in your area. The competition might be different. The exchange building might have different problems to overcome. There might be significantly more problems in getting power to more of the cabinets. There are many factors.

You might find that, based on BT's profitability criteria, your neighbouring exchange just squeaks over by 0.1%, while your exchange just falls under by 0.1%.

Now think about those BT criteria on profitability. Right now, in the presence of possible BDUK funding subsidies, you won't find BT "bending the rules" on the concept of profitability. The EU has to OK the concept of government subsidies, and BT will need to prove its numbers - and it won't be able to do so when it is "fudging" in some places. If anything, BDUK will have made BT be *more* clinical about its decisions.

If your exchange is indeed very similar, then it is either unannounced yet (unlikely - even BT says they've announced almost all the commercially-viable exchanges now) or it is likely to be in the set that gets announced as BDUK funding comes in. It might not be BT that gets the BDUK funding, but the council would (presumably) make sure the funding went to exchange areas being left out.

Unless, of course, Cuckoo Oak is being caught up in the Telford & Wrekin withdrawal from BDUK funding. In which case you are being affected by BDUK being around, but get no advantage. Perhaps the council is the best place to complain to?
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sat 29-Sep-12 14:31:54
Print Post

Re: Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[re: WWWombat] [link to this post]
 
There are also factors like how many people in an area actually have a BT line as opposed to a Virgin one.

It could be that the exchange lines are similar but in the town that is being upgraded had more BT lines in use that the other.

There will have been quite a complicated cost/benefit analysis performed with all sorts of criteria thrown in not just line numbers.

If the numbers don't add up then your not in the rollout easy at that.

Of course had the government had just given OR £800million like they asked they would have rolled out FTTC to a lot more of the country.

So perhaps blaming the curent governemt for setting up the BDUK rather than paying somebody to do the job is also in hand.
Standard User Danh_Gbwe
(newbie) Sat 29-Sep-12 15:28:27
Print Post

Re: Angry with Openreach over FTTC row


[re: MCM] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by MCM:
In reply to a post by adslmax:
Can you explain that anamoly, Mr. Saffron?
It would appear that BT don't consider Cuckoo Oak to be currently commercially viable. Is that so hard to understand? You complain yet you have access to VM which is more than many others users.

Many, including many thousands on much larger exchanges than yourself, have access to neither VM nor BT's FTTC/FTTP. For example, I'm on the Vauxhall exchange in central London, 22,750 residential premises, yet I have no access to either VM or FTTC/FTTP. The reason? Despite being over 2km from the exchange all of the lines on my late 1980s development are Exchange Only and with 75 units the development is too small for BT to consider installing a local PCP cab and an FTTC twin.


What is commercially viable? seems the amount of people connected has no baring. I thought it would have.
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to