but Exploring Solutions means waiting to find out what they can afford to deliver a solution, while ensuring value for money to the tax payer and that might be 2016, or it might be 2018 and beyond.
If the op has a fixed wireless operator in the area then you may find the value for money bit is disregarded.
I could drive you around an area where Fibre has been run over miles of poles and underground. the underground sections have involved digging up roads and closing them for some days each time.
his is for an entirely FTTP solution that nobody there has asked for.
This in itself is not unusual , however when you factor in the end points of these runs vary from 2 remote properties , to a remote hamlet with 3 houses and a pub , all the way up to villages with between 6 and 20 properties in them each then you could seriously question the value for money of such expenditure?
The common factor is there is a measurable 40 Mbps per property fixed wireless network in the area, providing a Broadband and telephone service to ALL the properties covered by the above Fibre roll out. To add to this there are no leased lines involved so Openreach make no money from this network either.
There are villages with larger populations just "over the hill" and outside the coverage of the fixed wireless network who have been told there are no plans to roll out Fibre to them as yet.
If the BDUK process is meant to show value for money for tax payers revenue then it doesn't in West Sussex, it is a farce.
It maybe of course the council in "I love Broadband's" coverage area are sensibly taking into consideration their service and spending the money in areas where no such choice exists instead?
Other counties Kijoma serve in appear to be doing so at least.
Bill Lewis - MD
Fixed wireless ISP - ISPA/CISAS/RIPE member