FTTPoD MDU funding

I've been thinking about whether FTTPoD, with the financials arranged differently, with little to no tie to a CP, could actually work quite nicely when it comes to MDUs.

While I might be wrong, I'm under the impression that the construction in terms of actually getting fibre to/into a building is the most expensive part of the whole process, and that while there'd obviously be a marginal cost of installing FTTP to each unit that wants it, the big scary construction cost might be a whole lot less scary if it can be divided amongst each individual unit/absorbed by a management company.

Obviously this would require Openreach to change the product so it's no longer tied into a CP with a 3 year contract, and for enough of those in a building to actually want to fund it a bit themselves/poke the various building management/landlords in order to get approval to do it, but it otherwise broadly seems like a more hands-on version of the way in which Hyperoptic seem to do things.

Please, people more knowledgeable than I, disabuse me of the feasibility of this idea .

If you didn't have a CP involved, how would your traffic get to and from between you and the rest of the world? In fact, how would it get any further than the Openreach GEA handover point at your exchange?

There's an awful lot more going on on top of your physical connection to the exchange.

To clarify, CPs would obviously need to be involved in terms of actually providing broadband services to individual customers, what I was proposing was severing/significantly reducing their role in ordering FTTPoD so that it's possible for those in an MDU to share the cost of FTTP installation, pick the CPs of their choice, and not be tied to a 3 year contract etc.

Of the 100,000+ FTTP lines Openreach have installed I believe 99.9% are native FTTP, i.e. same 12 month term and install pricing as the FTTC products.

FTTPoD is all about wiring a single person up at a time.

If you are looking at a MDU and want to wire say 200 existing flats to the Openreach network via FTTP, then a native approach is the way to go. i.e. approach Openreach after having discussed with building owner to ascertain whether suitable ducting is probably in place and locations for the ONT.

I think that could be achieved in many cases using existing facilities.

It would require the building management company, (if necessary newly formed by the residents), to liase with a builder and a wholesale broadband provider.

The builder has access to this document, just as we have. He would need to negotiate with Openreach over the detail for the particular site, then do the infrastructure installation for the fibre feeds by OR. Openreach may even be prepared to do that basic work when it isn't new build, but I expect it would cost more than a builder.

The Management Company could also set itself up as a small vISP and negotiate with the likes of TalkTalk Business, Enta, Murphy et al to use an existing GEA feed at the exchange and provide the ongoing backhaul and peering facilities.

Obviously a lot of negotiation would be needed before any commitments were made.

(Edit - MrSaffron's suggestion posted while I was drafting mine looks similar but simpler! It eliminates the vISP aspect).

Edited by RobertoS (Sun 26-Jan-14 16:39:02)

Maybe I shouldn't have framed this around FTTPoD, but if you're just one person who wants FTTP in an MDU, you currently have no actual way forward to get it that doesn't involve personally managing to persuade the building management company to do/finance all of that work, or taking on all of it yourself. This doesn't seem likely to happen in anything but the highest-end developments with a very high proportion of highly motivated and technically knowledgeable residents with masses of free time on their hands.

At the same time, the FTTPoD route, unless I'm mistaken, would necessitate a reasonably large amount of the same/most expensive bits of work to do 'native FTTP', being conducted by Openreach, just in order to get one user connected. This is even before we touch on the current way in which FTTPoD ties you to one particular CP for a broadband product for a full 3 year period, which is even more problematic for those who aren't owner-occupiers (which is obviously common in MDUs).

It just seems sort of reasonable to me that if you've got quite a number of people who live in one MDU who'd like FTTP and would be willing to split the installation costs, there could be a relatively simple route for them to do so, without necessitating that they must instead persuade their management company to organise and fund a full FTTP install for everyone.

Edited by deleted (Sun 26-Jan-14 16:58:03)

In reply to a post by hopkapi:

Maybe I shouldn't have framed this around FTTPoD, but if you're just one person who wants FTTP in an MDU, you currently have no actual way forward to get it that doesn't involve personally managing to persuade the building management company to do/finance all of that work, or taking on all of it yourself.

Openreach have already been installing FTTP in MDUs. They did a trial a couple of years ago too I believe.

There is an issue that existing MDUs need the freeholders permission to have FTTP installed (way-leave agreement). I know there are some people in MDUs that can order FTTP and some that cannot.

The biggest problem here is the developers. There are developers in Milton Keynes who are building new houses/apartments in FTTP areas and they are not being pre-wired for FTTP. This makes no sense and it is obviously a headache for Openreach. I would not be too happy if I moved into a brand new house or flat in a FTTP area, only to be told that NGA is not available because the Developers failed to work with Openreach to put the fibre infrastructure in place.

That's fair enough.

Working from MrSaffron's proposal, and on the basis of FTTP which basically is what the three of us are on about, then an Openreach distribution point does need locating in the building.

Individual users could then be connected to the ISP of their choice. The contract terms would be exactly the same as they are for customers of the same ISPs in an native FTTP area. AIUI, at the moment the 3-year term is because Openreach impose a three-month contract on the ISP. I have a feeling that is under review, but I could be wrong.

I suggested the/(a new) management company simply because that could be the best way to maximise the number of initial contributors. The building owners would anyway have to be involved in the permission for and positioning of that OR termination point, as MrSaffron said.

Of course, if you can already get FTTC then not many residents are likely to join in, whatever the method used. If you are in an FTTP area and the problem is simply the multi-occupancy building you stand a chance. If neither, but the exchange is GEA (fibre) enabled, the cost could be prohibitive as the nearest aggregation point could be a considerable distance away.

If the exchange is not GEA enabled, then there's no way forward until it is.

I did think it'd probably end up being a bit more work than just providing one user with FTTP, though I'm honestly interested if anyone knows what kind of costs we're talking about here so I can talk out of my [censored] a teeny bit less . Obviously the building owners would have to approve things either way, but there's quite a big difference between trying to get them to approve it, and them organising/funding the whole thing. In practice I was thinking something of something along the lines of Race to Infinity crossed with Kickstarter, though obviously this might mean a situation where Openreach would have to interact with actual end users, which makes it seem a bit less likely.

The particular building I'm thinking about is now on track to get FTTC by the end of May, and is hopefully not too far from an aggregation point considering it's literally next to an activated exchange .

If the exchange has FTTC or FTTP on it already, and there are cabinets with FTTC within 500-1000m then a price of around £1,000 per flat would be a rough ball park figure.

Flats due to their varied construction always are slightly bespoke, so for example if their is a comms room with space for fibre splitter, this may save the need for a pavement chamber and reduce price slightly.

Only real way to know is to engage Openreach after having found out if your ideas are just yours, or you can get say 100 other people to order.

I've wondered about this a little, especially in the case of having a landlord or a maintenance company involved.

What you'd want is a kind of split, where the landlord or maintenance company takes something of the long-term risk, perhaps more directly with Openreach, leaving an individual owner or tenant to sit with a standard 12-18 month contract term with a standard ISP.

On a different front though... I suspect that the charge made for FTTPoD, to a single householder, is already set at a level that is a discount to what it actually costs to install the first subscriber in the area: BT will spend money to put in place a full splitter, full DP, full manifold, and over-specified ducting & BFT. But I suspect that the charge made for FTTPoD only manages to cover a portion of those parts.

If that's true, it makes it less likely to get much of a discount when combining the order.

Yes, the costs of FTTPoD only cover a proportion of the cost, i.e. BT is taking the gamble on further orders and the long term they will goto FTTP eventually, and I mean long term

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

and the long term they will goto FTTP eventually, and I mean long term

Agree fully.

We know the FTTC cabs have a 12-15 year payback, and I'd guess a 20 year lifespan.

I guess that the current product design for FTTPoD will continue until we have take-up akin to that we see today for FTTC - ie 15-20%. After that, it'd make sense to swap to strategic rollout in place of an ad-hoc one.

The interesting thing will be how fast or slow the market creates the takeup, and whether FTTdp gets to play an intermediary role.

its about bulk orders. The first installation is going to be a loss maker, its the same case with FTTC really, if BT enable a cabinet and only one guy orders it he is a loss maker. FTTP like FTTC is profitable eventually providing enough people in any given area order it. It may cost say 2k to activate the first customer but then if his neighbour orders it may cost £50 to activate the neighbour, bringing the average down to 1k each. Another 8 neighburs order and its down to £200 each.

Of course the chances of there been enough FTTP orders to get the numbers right is low for what I feel is 2 prime reasons excluding marketing, (a) FTTC rollout is occuring at the same time, FTTC is creating enough buzz and performance improvement for people to be mostly happy with it, and of course (b) the contract lengths plus cost. The question is how would FTTP playout if FTTC didnt exist as a product and FTTP was priced similiar or at least not much more than FTTC. I think it certianly would have decent takeup but BT have a higher outlay with FTTP so the risks are higher and of course they seem to have not nailed down rolling it out efficiently, reports of bodged schedules, install's been missed and so on. BT taking weeks/months to install FTTP for one properly whilst someone like verizon just pass every house and then install it in days when ordered. There seems something about BT's FTTP rollout which doesnt add up, either BT's network is in a really dire state making it diffilcult to get FTTP deployed or the procedure's are bad. The speed of the FTTC rollout seems out of character for BT as openreach are bad at almost everything else. Certianly I think one key mistake was trying to put FTTP in places like cornwall ahead of cities like leicester, leeds, manchester, birmingham etc.

Edited by Chrysalis (Sun 26-Jan-14 21:45:32)