FTTPoD unreal pricing

So guess what FTTPoD is being priced out of this world under the new scheme of pricing.

Just had the estimated pricing come back to put in FTTPoD to my house.

£18100 ex VAT

Compared to the pricing on the old method of £2750 ex VAT.

Guess there won't be many of those being installed at that sort of silly pricing. For that price, I can have a 1G connection installed and the fibre laid.

It will be cheaper for me to have a leased line installed than pay that amount.

People really got their hopes up when new pricing was first announced but this seems to confirm the product is still not designed for mass rollout.

In reply to a post by dw_soothill:

So guess what FTTPoD is being priced out of this world under the new scheme of pricing.

Just had the estimated pricing come back to put in FTTPoD to my house.

£18100 ex VAT

Compared to the pricing on the old method of £2750 ex VAT.

Guess there won't be many of those being installed at that sort of silly pricing. For that price, I can have a 1G connection installed and the fibre laid.

It will be cheaper for me to have a leased line installed than pay that amount.

LOL, and theres me thinking mine was expensive when it came through this morning!

We have now received the estimate of the charges from BT. These are detailed below.

Estimated Build Cost: £6000.00 ex VAT
The build charge includes the estimate for the work and materials required to deliver the service. It also includes the connection charge.

Number of premises passed for FTTP: 12
The build estimate includes a reduction for the number of premises passed as these would be able to obtain FTTP as a consequence of your build. Customers at these premises may submit a linked FTTPoD order to share the construction costs. You will receive a discount of £700.00 ex VAT from this figure for each linked order that is served by your build. Linked orders may be submitted to Cerberus Networks at the customer�s own risk. If one order is cancelled this will cancel all the linked orders so you must find a way for all parties to work together to share any costs.

Please note that this is an estimated price based on network records. There are a number of factors that may affect the final costs. These would be only confirmed by a full survey once you place an order for the service.

To proceed with an order, you must pay the £250.00 ex VAT survey charge. The survey will normally take place within 3 weeks. After the survey, you will have 28 days to accept or reject the confirmed build charge. This will be presented as Excess Construction Charges (ECCs). If you do not accept the ECCs and wish to cancel the order, the survey charge will stand. If you decide to proceed with the order, the survey charge will be deducted from the total ECC figure.

Guess I win (lose) so far! Just got my email from Cerberus this morning: £39000.
Not sure how they think it will only pass 5 properties either.

Yes just got mine this morning - original pricing was under £3K I seem to remember (can't find my original quote at the moment) which was band B. New quote is £7100+vat and nothing about the monthly cost on the quote. Exact quote here:

We have now received the estimate of the charges from BT. These are detailed below.

Estimated Build Cost: £7100.00 ex VAT
The build charge includes the estimate for the work and materials required to deliver the service. It also includes the connection charge.

Number of premises passed for FTTP: 7
The build estimate includes a reduction for the number of premises passed as these would be able to obtain FTTP as a consequence of your build. Customers at these premises may submit a linked FTTPoD order to share the construction costs. You will receive a discount of £700.00 ex VAT from this figure for each linked order that is served by your build. Linked orders may be submitted to Cerberus Networks at the customer�s own risk. If one order is cancelled this will cancel all the linked orders so you must find a way for all parties to work together to share any costs.

Please note that this is an estimated price based on network records. There are a number of factors that may affect the final costs. These would be only confirmed by a full survey once you place an order for the service.

To proceed with an order, you must pay the £250.00 ex VAT survey charge. The survey will normally take place within 3 weeks. After the survey, you will have 28 days to accept or reject the confirmed build charge. This will be presented as Excess Construction Charges (ECCs). If you do not accept the ECCs and wish to cancel the order, the survey charge will stand. If you decide to proceed with the order, the survey charge will be deducted from the total ECC figure.


Immediate flaw with this (apart from the cost) is how do I know which 7 neighbours would also be served by my node? How would I know which neighbours to approach? I assume it will be my immediate neighbours to the left or right?

In reply to a post by AK0086:

Guess I win (lose) so far! Just got my email from Cerberus this morning: £39000.
Not sure how they think it will only pass 5 properties either.

Many congratulations. Be interesting to see if anyone is able to beat your record

PS - it won't be me as at those prices I don't think I will bother.

Immediate flaw with this (apart from the cost) is how do I know which 7 neighbours would also be served by my node? How would I know which neighbours to approach? I assume it will be my immediate neighbours to the left or right?

I was thinking that as I read your post. I am guessing that they will say that Data Protection means they can't tell you who they are.

Some of my immediate neighbours are houses and some are flats - does a premise only count if it is a single house?

If the flats can be served individually by FTTP then each one would be considered a separate premises. However, often flats aren't provided by FTTP due to the complexities of dealing with the owners of the property and possible build complications.

Got mine this morning too, £39000 ex vat !! Thought it would be expensive but Wow! Interestingly though it does say that 34 premises would be passed and that a £700 ex vat discount would be applied for each linked order but to try and coordinate all parties would be a nightmare. It says if one order is cancelled then that cancels all the linked orders too. See copy of email below.


Estimated Build Cost: £39000.00 ex VAT
The build charge includes the estimate for the work and materials required to deliver the service. It also includes the connection charge.

Number of premises passed for FTTP: 34
The build estimate includes a reduction for the number of premises passed as these would be able to obtain FTTP as a consequence of your build. Customers at these premises may submit a linked FTTPoD order to share the construction costs. You will receive a discount of £700.00 ex VAT from this figure for each linked order that is served by your build. Linked orders may be submitted to Cerberus Networks at the customer�s own risk. If one order is cancelled this will cancel all the linked orders so you must find a way for all parties to work together to share any costs.

I can't top that, but here's mine:

Old price: £7,675+VAT (previously quoted from Cerberus. Property is in band G, for which Openreach pricelist said £6,125 distance charge + £750 install charge). With the three-year front-loading of rental of approx £80/month, that makes £10,555+VAT.

New price: £13,700+VAT

It also says:

Number of premises passed for FTTP: 14

The build estimate includes a reduction for the number of premises passed as these would be able to obtain FTTP as a consequence of your build. Customers at these premises may submit a linked FTTPoD order to share the construction costs. You will receive a discount of £700.00 ex VAT from this figure for each linked order that is served by your build. Linked orders may be submitted to Cerberus Networks at the customer�s own risk. If one order is cancelled this will cancel all the linked orders so you must find a way for all parties to work together to share any costs.

The conclusion I draw is that Openreach has been finding these FTTPoD services *really* painful, and wants to stop people ordering them at all - rather than using FTTPoD as an opportunity to get their fibre rollout underway, with a large chunk of the cost paid up-front by keen subscribers.

Edited by candlerb (Wed 07-Mar-18 09:37:05)

Monthly price is £100+vat by the way - 12 month contract.

Interesting that some quotes are for 34 premises passed but mine is only for 7 - I live on a suburban street in NW London with many houses on my road so not sure why they would only consider 7 additional houses to be enabled?

Had tried to warn that TCO over three years with a 1 year term and standard FTTP pricing was going to front load the on demand charge.

A 1 Gbps leased line might be cheaper to install, but over a few years they'll make more money from you due to high monthly fee

I think we were expecting the TCO over 3 years to be similar however that clearly isn't the case unless you can sign up significant numbers of neighbours to reduce the install charge.

And the really sad thing is that it's now a poker game. If I don't accept this pricing straight away, but come back in 6 months or a year, I could find it has increased again.

I would be quite prepared to pay the 3 years rental costs for a 12 month service but this is no where near 3 years rental costs.

In fact I could have a 100/100 leased line for 3 years for less than this install cost.

Does anyone know what the cost is of laying a small bore duct per metre under a road surface?

Thinking Micro-trenching would probably be cheapest.

I am 300m from an access duct to City Fibre but they will only extend out around 150m from the last access point.

Wondering if it would be cheaper to lay my own ducting in and blow some fibre through.

Cerberus have told me that the DMCS Gigabit Voucher Scheme is going to be extended nationwide so that would potentially take £3000 off the install costs.

https://gigabitvoucher.culture.gov.uk/

Also apparently OpenReach haven't decided what information can be released about the premises passed (e.g. specific addresses). You would think they would have decided on all of this before handing out quotes?

Edited by brookheather (Wed 07-Mar-18 09:46:31)

There isn't much point in Cerberus telling you that you can get a £700 reduction for getting a passed premises to place a linked order, if Openreach won�t tell them which premises could order. It�s idiotic.

Also at the sort of figures quoted earlier, £700 is insignificant. What price are they going to charge the additional ones anyway? Standard FTTP?

Interesting... so Openreach increased my quote by £3,000, the same time as £3,000 gigabit vouchers are about to be rolled out by the government. Coincidence I'm sure

Just got mine too ...

Estimated Build Cost: £8800.00 ex VAT
The build charge includes the estimate for the work and materials required to deliver the service. It also includes the connection charge.

Number of premises passed for FTTP: 1
The build estimate includes a reduction for the number of premises passed as these would be able to obtain FTTP as a consequence of your build. Customers at these premises may submit a linked FTTPoD order to share the construction costs. You will receive a discount of £700.00 ex VAT from this figure for each linked order that is served by your build. Linked orders may be submitted to Cerberus Networks at the customer�s own risk. If one order is cancelled this will cancel all the linked orders so you must find a way for all parties to work together to share any costs.

Not sure where they get 1 premise passed from, I am 50 foot from the nearest pole which serves about 20 premises and so if the fibre came to the pole then all those could also potentially get FTTPoD. If they don't use the pole, then Cab 1 which serves most of the central part of town is only 100 foot in the opposite direction!

Strikes me they want to discourage FTTPoD installations.

I already have FTTC but want more upstream bandwidth so looks like it will be cheaper for me to install multiple FTTC lines and find someone that will bond them.

Others did the same in the past e.g. seen some install fees go from £195 before vouchers to £1 below voucher limit.

Just had our quote through for a Business Premises


Estimated Build Cost: £38400.00 ex VAT
The build charge includes the estimate for the work and materials required to deliver the service. It also includes the connection charge.

Wow

Leased line is far cheaper.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

Interesting... so Openreach increased my quote by £3,000, the same time as £3,000 gigabit vouchers are about to be rolled out by the government. Coincidence I'm sure

Or the Openreach one was unchanged, and Cerberus added the £3,000. Or a mix of the two.

Remember, Cerberus must add their wages and other existential costs to everything, then add a profit. If they just passed on what they get charged for things they wouldn�t last very long .

In reply to a post by Ripley:

Just had our quote through for a Business Premises


Estimated Build Cost: £38400.00 ex VAT
The build charge includes the estimate for the work and materials required to deliver the service. It also includes the connection charge.

Wow

Leased line is far cheaper.

This probably explains why FluidOne were receiving a higher than normal amount of last minute orders under the old pricing before their cut off date on 23rd Feb as many people were fearful of increased installation costs. I imagine the quotes for these last minute orders would have been generated before 1st Feb, which was when the new OR pricing kicked in though not the new BT Wholesale pricing (23rd feb).

I've managed to get a 100 meg leased line with free installation for £379 / month, over 3 years that's going to be just under £14000

A lot of money but cheaper than I thought

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

A 1 Gbps leased line might be cheaper to install, but over a few years they'll make more money from you due to high monthly fee

However, given the properties passed scenario, it is actually cheaper to get a leased line and just share it with neighbours instead of paying more for an inferior product (PON vs AON) that also has to be shared.

My quote was also £8,800, but with 26 properties passed (they're not including flats, otherwise it'd be 32 buildings, with 6 of them being multi-dwelling. However, if I got all 26 on board, then how does the £700 discount work? 26 x £700 = £18,200 - do I get £9,400 back?!

In reply to a post by candlerb:

Old price: £7,675+VAT (previously quoted from Cerberus. Property is in band G, for which Openreach pricelist said £6,125 distance charge + £750 install charge). With the three-year front-loading of rental of approx £80/month, that makes £10,555+VAT.

New price: £13,700+VAT

Errrrr...under the old FTTPoD pricing Cerberus charged ~ £165 per month, not £80 per month. So over 3 years you'd pay £13615 in total versus new price of £13700 plus line rental of ~ £100 pm on a 12 month min term. Not too dissimilar.

People are free to create their own ISP and sub let the leased line, so long as T&C allow it and you want to deal with all that.

Essentially this is what B4RN do, with the difference that their leased lines feed into a large fibre network they have created.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Had tried to warn that TCO over three years with a 1 year term and standard FTTP pricing was going to front load the on demand charge.

Indeed Mr S:

Fibre on Demand a cautionary tale

In a nutshell: for lone installs under the new pricing, you're also paying for your neighbours to have free FTTP.

Edited by deleted (Wed 07-Mar-18 14:08:23)

I just got my quote through. I think I will be holding out for it to be delivered natively!

Dear Customer

Thank you for requesting an estimate of the installation costs for FTTP on Demand at xxxxxxxxBelfast, BT8 .

We have now received the estimate of the charges from BT. These are detailed below.

Estimated Build Cost: £39000.00 ex VAT
The build charge includes the estimate for the work and materials required to deliver the service. It also includes the connection charge.

Number of premises passed for FTTP: 12
The build estimate includes a reduction for the number of premises passed as these would be able to obtain FTTP as a consequence of your build. Customers at these premises may submit a linked FTTPoD order to share the construction costs. You will receive a discount of £700.00 ex VAT from this figure for each linked order that is served by your build. Linked orders may be submitted to Cerberus Networks at the customer�s own risk. If one order is cancelled this will cancel all the linked orders so you must find a way for all parties to work together to share any costs.

Please note that this is an estimated price based on network records. There are a number of factors that may affect the final costs. These would be only confirmed by a full survey once you place an order for the service.

To proceed with an order, you must pay the £250.00 ex VAT survey charge. The survey will normally take place within 3 weeks. After the survey, you will have 28 days to accept or reject the confirmed build charge. This will be presented as Excess Construction Charges (ECCs). If you do not accept the ECCs and wish to cancel the order, the survey charge will stand. If you decide to proceed with the order, the survey charge will be deducted from the total ECC figure.

If you wish to proceed to an order for FTTPoD, please Click here.

If you have any questions about the FTTPoD service please contact the sales team on 0345 257 1333 or at [email protected].

Thanks again for your interest in this service.

Cerberus Networks

I too just got my £39,000 quote. Only two premises passed, which I know to be incorrect (it's at least four, plus mine). Good grief.

Is there something magical about £39K? Perhaps based on a cap?

Reality is that there is a reason why Vodafone and others when approaching their FTTP roll-outs are looking to do whole streets at the same time, i.e. costs drop massively when you do things that way, rather than a piecemeal method.

No regulator is going to act over the Openreach FoD pricing either, since if it is actually higher than it needs to be, it is creating a wider space for alternate operators to exist within.

I was thinking that as well, my quote also came in at £39000 ,must be some maximum cost limit as that is 3 or 4 people with the same figure.

Edited by pipcoo (Wed 07-Mar-18 13:06:33)

I got my quote today too - £39+VAT so a ridiculous amount! Although there are *many* on the same street it says the number of premises passed is only 6.

Has anyone been able to get more information about the route taken and what they've considered to be a "premises passed" before asking for a proper survey?

Is this the 3rd person in this thread that has signed up today on TBB and in their first post, has posted a quotation from Cerberus for FoD of £39,000?

I could understand if the costs came out the same but they are not.

I got pricing beforehand and the thing that put me off was the 3 year contract as this market is moving so fast.

I don't mind paying a front-loaded cost understanding that they have 12 months rather than 36 to recoup the cost.

But they are wanting nearly twice the price compared to before.

Perhaps OpenReach have analysed the actual costs of providing FFTPoD recently and decided that the previous pricing was woefully inadequate to cover their actual costs. I have seen the many posts from members who have ordered FTTPoD and their installations seemed to require many ducts to be cleared or poles to be replaced etc. which must make it more expensive than previously estimated.

Got my £39000 quote this morning too.

"Estimated Build Cost: £39000.00 ex VAT"
"Number of premises passed for FTTP: 4"

Looks like they just got bored and sent everyone a £39000 quote

Based off absolute worst case scenario is what these £39k quotes sound like, as you said with extra costs of unknown blocked ducts etc.

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

Errrrr...under the old FTTPoD pricing Cerberus charged ~ £165 per month, not £80 per month

I'm looking at the *difference* between the wholesale rental under the old and new models, to find out how much Openreach gained from the higher rental on the original 3 year contract.

Old model: rental £1188 per year (£99 per month), 3 year contract.

New model: rental £456 per year (£38 per month) for 330/30; or £253.68 per year (£21.14 per month) for 160/30, 1 year contract.

So the premium you paid for the first 3 years service under the old model was £61 (+VAT) per month - possibly £77.86 if you can find anyone prepared to sell you the new 160/30 service.

Yes: the service provider will probably add some markup on that. But an estimate of £80+VAT per month is being pretty generous to Openreach I think.

Fair enough but you have to remember one thing: despite everyone's assumptions (incl mine) that overall ownership costs were expected to remain the same, this was never written in stone. So based on the feedback (albeit limited) so far, it appears the overall costs -for lone installs at least- have actually increased under the new pricing. Reason? Only Openreach can answer that... Though multiple cases of people being quoted 39k for installation does sound rather odd!

Edited by deleted (Wed 07-Mar-18 14:39:57)

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

Though multiple cases of people being quoted 39k for installation does sound rather odd!

Not necessarily by Openreach.

I wonder what Fluidone's estimates would be.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

The conclusion I draw is that Openreach has been finding these FTTPoD services *really* painful, and wants to stop people ordering them at all - rather than using FTTPoD as an opportunity to get their fibre rollout underway, with a large chunk of the cost paid up-front by keen subscribers.

This is exactly my thoughts. FTTPoD could have been a way to encourage more fibre roll out, even if it was just an indicator for demand. But it seems when push comes to shove someone somewhere isn't prepared to use FTTPoD as a way to spearhead a full rollout of full fibre.

There doesn't seem to be any recognition that the customer by ordering these services are doing OR a favour too.

Looking at the comments from you guys - i too will chuck my penny on the table, got my quote, its £14,600 + vat, 9 premises passed but wont tell which they are due to legal reasons, which is really stupid,

what a load [censored]

9 premises passed but wont tell which they are due to legal reasons

It is interesting as I don't believe there would be anything stopping BT giving the addresses. I can understand the customer's name would be withheld (and indeed they may not even know it) but the address is not personal data.

We had a quote from Fluidone before the new pricing of £5925 + £320pm(36 month contract)
Received a price from Cerberus under the new pricing of £10,400 + £100pm (12 month contract)

So the new pricing will break even vs the old in 2 years

Compared with the £640pm we currently pay for a microwave link we also break even in much less than 2 years.

Kudos to Cerberus, when I rang to kick off the survey they suggested waiting a few weeks for the voucher scheme to be extended and also to discuss with other companies served from our telephone pole to see if we can share the cost. Unusual for a company to 'turn down' an order to save you money

Spooky huh ?

I have FTTPoD right now - some of my neighbours want to take advantage. Given the pole has the fibre running to it now I wonder whether this would be taken into account if a quote was raised?

How can we make sure they get the best price?

In reply to a post by Jabes:

I have FTTPoD right now - some of my neighbours want to take advantage. Given the pole has the fibre running to it now I wonder whether this would be taken into account if a quote was raised?

How can we make sure they get the best price?

Have you checked whether they can now get native FTTP - when your FFTPoD was activated didn't your neighbours then get native FTTP showing as available? Or are they not immediate neighbours?

In reply to a post by Jabes:

I have FTTPoD right now - some of my neighbours want to take advantage. Given the pole has the fibre running to it now I wonder whether this would be taken into account if a quote was raised?

How can we make sure they get the best price?

At present none of your immediate neighbours (or mine) can order 'native' FTTP as we had FTTPoD installed under the old pricing model. I'm not sure if/when this will ever change, it all depends on whether Openreach made allowances for additional installations eg by installing multi-port fttp splitters or whether they installed our service purely for a single user. Getting a fresh FTTPoD quote for one of your immediate neighbours will give you an idea on how much work is req'd to bring them on board - installation costs of less than £1k suggest not much work is required but anything above will mean a significant amount of work is req'd.

That only happens with the new pricing orders. It wasn't the case with the old pricing orders (with a few exceptions apparently, though haven't seen cases myself).

I got the same:

Estimated Build Cost: £39000.00 ex VAT

My estate already has FTTP on some houses, there is cable ducts all the way round the estate up to my house door.

Crazy price!

In reply to a post by MarkLeman:

We had a quote from Fluidone before the new pricing of £5925 + £320pm(36 month contract)
Received a price from Cerberus under the new pricing of £10,400 + £100pm (12 month contract)

So the new pricing will break even vs the old in 2 years

Except that if you'd gone with Cerberus on the old pricing, it would have been something like £160pm on 36 month contract; making the 3 year cost less.

I'm a little surprised Ceberus are charging £100pm for the service, when their regular FTTP Pro 330/50 is £62.50 per month. Definitely worth threatening to change providers after 12 months

Spooky and confusing.

I'm assuming this was also from Cerberus?

I would try an alternative provider. Something is clearly wrong with so many people getting an identical quotation, unless you're all neighbours.

A job for Fred, Velma and the gang for sure.

Yep, definitely bit suspicious us all getting the same quote!

Except that if you'd gone with Cerberus on the old pricing, it would have been something like £160pm on 36 month contract; making the 3 year cost less.

Agreed, my comparison was not quite like-for-like, but I did want to show that some of the install quotes are not too far from what was expected i.e. the cost total at 3 years would be the same. We had been led to expect that the the install cost under the new system would be 2-3 times the price install under the old, in our case it has come out at ~2x.

As a business I can justify this, especially if the voucher scheme is extended nationwide and we can share with another company next door. As a private individual it would not make sense.

As for Cerberus charging 100 p/m, which is more than for the same service on ordinary FTTP, they do leave them selves open to a renegotiation at 12 months, which will inevitably invite users to jump ship.

Personally I still think that once you have paid the for the install it should be a normal FTTP line like any other. You have done the 'oD' bit so its time to be 'FTTP'

I raised some questions with Cerberus, and got a very prompt evening response - certainly good service from their sales team.

I asked about the monthly pricing, and they said £100+VAT per month as others have already said here, as opposed to £62.50+VAT for their regular FTTP Pro product. The reason they gave was that FTTPoD and WBC FTTP were charged differently.

That doesn't seem right given that the OR published wholesale prices for FTTP GEA and FTTPoD rental (for 330/30 and 330/50 services) are identical; but possibly BT Wholesale is charging them differently?

The other question I asked was, if I got other customers to join in a linked order, what would the setup charge be for them? The answer was £495+VAT each. Unfortunately that almost wipes out the £700 per PON benefit of a joined order. The other people would be better off simply waiting, and then they could get a regular FTTP service, and pay a regular install fee *and* get the service much cheaper than Cerberus' £120 (inc VAT) per month.

I think Cerberus need to tune their pricing if they are going to take the opportunity to grab multiple new customers this way.

Edited by candlerb (Thu 08-Mar-18 08:34:28)

Yes the multiple order discount is a bit of a mess, I am not sure if that is down to Openreach or Cerberus.

Common sense would say that there is a minimum fee, even if the fiber is on the pole outside right outside, so if several properties want to order simultaneously then the part of the install fee to get the fiber to the pole should be split evenly + the each property pays the bit from the pole to themselves. I guess this is too obvious

Cerberus have suggested that if the company next to us are interested (and if the voucher scheme is extended), we can both apply for vouchers and do a linked order, they can arrange it so both vouchers are accepted and we settle the difference between us. I can see a bit of organisation will be needed but I am up for it.

So in this thread, AK0086, pipcoo, NuttyMucker, shane605, and kingbiscit all got the same estimation of £39000.

Can I ask if you are a business or residential customer asking for the quote?

Has anyone received a quote from Fluidone... it would be interesting to know what the difference is between their's and Cerberus's. I had a quote for £30k from Cerberus - ouch.

My £39k quote is for a residential property.

Presumably the £500 pays for network equipment and Cerberus time to do the connection.

If one person is willing to foot the whole initial install bill then others are indeed better to wait until it is done and then get it "cheap". The problem is if no one person can afford the install then everyone can club together to share the cost and make it viable - if that doesn't happen then they won't get it at all.

In reply to a post by ian72:

Presumably the £500 pays for network equipment and Cerberus time to do the connection.

It's not for network equipment. Their standard 330/30 FTTP service has just a £40 activation fee - free if you sign up for 2 years - and even has a discount for the first 3 months service fee. They already include the cost of the router in that.

The Openreach wholesale cost for a new FTTP connection (£92) is the same for FTTPoD, now that that the FTTPoD build costs are entirely separate.

It could be a charge from BT Wholesale, if they add their own charges on top of Openreach. I don't have visibility of those, unlike the OR price lists which are published.

It could be a charge by Cerberus to cover the administration of managing linked orders. If so, it will likely backfire because people could simply wait until the PON is active, and then order regular FTTP separately - at which point there is a much wider choice of providers to place the order with, including BT and Zen, with lower monthly costs than Cerberus.

Of course it could simply be Cerberus' way of saying: "we really, really don't want the hassle of dealing with linked orders, please go away"

In reply to a post by bowdon:

So in this thread, AK0086, pipcoo, NuttyMucker, shane605, and kingbiscit all got the same estimation of £39000.

Can I ask if you are a business or residential customer asking for the quote?

Residential

Is there any way to find out where this £39000 quote comes from.

It as been said by a couple of people to be odd that so many (5 on the thread) all have the same quote.

Is there some kind of cap at £39000 ?

In reply to a post by bowdon:

So in this thread, AK0086, pipcoo, NuttyMucker, shane605, and kingbiscit all got the same estimation of £39000.

Can I ask if you are a business or residential customer asking for the quote?

And me. I'm a small business (albeit not VAT-registered, because most of my revenue is services delivered outside the EEA).

Residential

As above - I am part of the £39,000 club - Residental too

In reply to a post by dotbill:

As above - I am part of the £39,000 club - Residental too

It seems to be a popular club!

@GenuineCerberus - Where does the £39,000 number come from?

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

At present none of your immediate neighbours (or mine) can order 'native' FTTP as we had FTTPoD installed under the old pricing model. I'm not sure if/when this will ever change

They have installed a multi-port connectorised interface at the top of my pole.

I jokingly said to one of my neighbours that we could do some point-to-point wifi but in actuality that might be the best solution for them - and it would be quite fun!

My residential quote £12800+VAT with 12 mystery premises 'passed'
No idea where the 12 comes from, there are only 10 other homes that appear to have drop wires from the same pole as mine.

Edited by deleted (Thu 08-Mar-18 17:01:54)

I am so glad i ordered when I did. I knew I wanted it and it was too risky to wait and since I was happy with paying what the cost was at the time, I couldn't complain if it went down.

Sorry for the others who missed out.

It seems to me the value of the new pricing will depend on being able to both share costs, and qualify for some of the upcoming £3k SME vouchers.

Eg, for an initial build of £13k, if 2x SMEs plus 2x residences all share the net 1st year costs equally, then its only about £2k each. It might be argued that true fibre adds much more than £2k to the value of each property, so it becomes a no brainer even if none of them wants it for themselves. For the same cost with purely residential you would need 8 households to all agree which is maybe too big an ask.

I imagine a popular club that no one wants to be in!

So what strikes me as criminal is that £39k is way in excess of the prices being banded around for FTTC cabinet costs a couple of years ago (e.g. when community groups were seeking quotes). And if I'm correct, these properties being quoted for FTTPoD must already be served by a PCP with an FTTC twin (even if too far away to get a decent speed).

It would be interesting to know how far, and with ducting or pole supply, people thing they are from their VDSL cabinet and hence existing fibre. It almost sounds like Openreach are planning to trench all the way, across a couple of rivers and motorways in the process!!

Would also be interested to know if anyone knows what typical civils pricing is, and likewise the labour and materials element of stringing some fibre along a line of poles. Is this a case of no regulation and few suppliers taking consumers for a ride? Or does it really cost that much?

Andrew, is this something you could run a news investigation on? Because it sounds pretty crazy. Of course there's not a lot to compare at present...

Mine is £3,900 with 15 premises passed - I guess that makes me a 10 percenter

£10600 plus VAT, 3 premises passed for me. 1100m from agg node radially, about 1985m by duct and poles.

People in the £39k club, are you all on slow connections and long distance from exchange please?

It's a big number, just wonder how far you can get for that much money.

It's not priced from the nearest FTTC cabinet. It's priced from the nearest Fibre Aggregation Node. An Agg Node usually serves 3 or 4 FTTC cabinets, so the chances are that for most people the nearest Agg Node is further away than their local PCP.

Does anyone with a huge quote know what band they were in under the old pricing? For quotes where the Agg Node is 1-2km+ away then civil costs can really start to rack up. They are no longer recouping the cost of a 3 year contract so a large jump on price was to be expected.

Perhaps any quote for a distance above x is automatically £39k. Those with such high quotes it would be helpful if you could give some more info like any known distances or previous price bands.

I don't know about installing BT's standard ducting, which is something like 2" buried around 0.5m depth.

Mole ploughing however would cost something like £30 a meter at commercial rate (including wayleaves) assuming rural open land without substantial remedial works.

JFDI costs are realistically around £9/m - less if like B4RN you can get landowners to minimise wayleaves and chip-in with help.

My guess is that fresh OR ducting would be a far higher cost than £30/m (but it has the merits of being totally future-proof) but clearing existing duct and pulling connectorised fibre would inevitably be cheaper than that.

If poles exist to the property, then stringing pre-made fibre (or ducting overhead) using those poles would be cheaper still.

My guess is that OR could light a passive network connection somewhere starting a floor of £20 per meter (only a wild guess). Depends if you count the pension deficit in the mix...

Running 2" ducts to premises seems a little old-school in the 21st century for the 'last mile'. Blowing fibre via very small micro-ducting (say 7mm overhead or direct buried - larger if a large number of premises are passed) should give the comfort of almost infinite future-proofing, as Fibre capacity in due course should allow terabits of data per second (depending on media blown).

In the US utility poles in major cities look like spaghetti junction. I wonder how many people in UK cities, towns and villages want overhead blight to spoil their now pretty clear skyward views.

Inevitably keeping future-proofing and standards of planning is expensive.

I'm 100% not defending OR - but providing a DSLAM to bring FTTC nearer to premises is WAY, WAY cheaper than sorting the last mile with new fibre.

For all the critique of their strategy thus far - up to 80Mbps will cover almost any conceivable household use for the next 5-7 years. If you really need more, then you have to be doing something incredibly esoteric with your connection when 20Mbps or so provides for UHD/4k streaming.

By any account that's a massive win for the UK.

All except for the last few percent covered with a tech that allows for streaming to devices still a couple of years from being anything other than fringe consumer product. I'd say we should be genuinely proud that we've managed to get this done as a nation. Not every nation has done this as well as we have in short-order.

I do think there does have to be some really fierce criticism of the way that BDUK effectively paid for FTTC cabinets without insisting that each cabinet had to have a new ag-node next to each subsidy driven cabinet. This is particularly unfair on those of us who are too remote to get any kind of VDSL or ADSL.

There's a real [censored] moment of revelation, when you realise that billions have been incurred by the treasury and for the sake of perhaps 5% of that - the 95%+ of people who have access to 24Mbps from FTTC could have had a AG node delivered to at most within 1 mile of their premises.

OR presumably saved a couple of thousand pounds per cabinet by not extending the fibre in a future-proof way.

How much easier would it be now were there an ag-node pair at the foot of each fancy new green cabinet?

I really think this is fundamentally what the claw-back should at least try to achieve at a minimum. It seems risible that almost all FTTPod orders have to provide for several Km of fibre extra, so overbuilding pretty much what was done to provide fibre links to DSLAMs already on the route.

Just my random thoughts. My huge sympathies to the £39k brigade. The remoteness of your premises from the AG node probably means there's some JFDI solution which needs lateral thought and people power to deliver.

100% worth lobbying your local authority delivering BDUK - they may well be able to effectively pay for an Ag node to be brought closer to you through the claw-back in due-course. The numbers of premises who are in white areas for BDUK are more than 10's of thousands for each BDUK authority - so those who shout loudest are going to get prioritised.

Nothing to do with the exchange, it�s the aggregation node it is priced from.

Hi Zarjaz,


I was just being vague, as in this particular location it happens to be quite near the exchange. The head end is at a larger exchange a few miles away. The exchange it's self, only serves around 1200 premises.

Thanks for your many helpful reply's to questions on the forum. I always find them informative. Keep up the good work.

I was band H (about 6Km) with a £10-£11k install cost under the old pricing, £15.8k under the new pricing. So with the 1 year contract the total install cost for three years has gone down (very slightly).

Given an aggregation node is expected to serve 1440 premises once everyone on FTTP then if exchange covers 1,200 it sort of makes sense.

There is no cap set by Openreach, so the £39,000 is coincidence or a result of provider add-ons

In reply to a post by F9B54DA3BB3C:

I was band H (about 6Km) with a £10-£11k install cost under the old pricing, £15.8k under the new pricing. So with the 1 year contract the total install cost for three years has gone down (very slightly).

Band H was 2000 - 2999m I believe.

Doesn't that suggest those with £39k quotes are bands I, J or even K distances.

In reply to a post by j0hn83:

In reply to a post by F9B54DA3BB3C:

I was band H (about 6Km) with a £10-£11k install cost under the old pricing, £15.8k under the new pricing. So with the 1 year contract the total install cost for three years has gone down (very slightly).

Band H was 2000 - 2999m I believe.

Doesn't that suggest those with £39k quotes are bands I, J or even K distances.

Indeed it is. Serves me right for taking the distance I was told in the quote at face value rather than checking against the openreach list!

In reply to a post by robert_fl:

the way that BDUK effectively paid for FTTC cabinets without insisting that each cabinet had to have a new ag-node next to each subsidy driven cabinet.

They could have insisted, but it would have been more expensive. And, in a fixed-budget project, that means fewer premises passed.

That's hard to justify when the commercial rollout didn't put an AgNode at the foot of every PCP. Why would you need to when they are dimensioned differently? (AgNode ~ 1400 premises, PCP average 300 premises).

In reply to a post by robert_fl:

This is particularly unfair on those of us who are too remote to get any kind of VDSL or ADSL.

That means you haven't had any subsidy spent on you yet, while the projects are still ongoing.

We'd expect that half of the remaining premises will get SF coverage still, before the USO kicks in.

In reply to a post by robert_fl:

There's a real [censored] moment of revelation, when you realise that billions have been incurred by the treasury

Really?

BT's accounts say they have received a total of £1.1bn so far (running at ~£60m per quarter at present), but have earmarked £530m for return to the local authorities.

Other suppliers will be taking in money, but nowhere near as much as BT has accumulated since 2013. It really isn't billions.

In reply to a post by robert_fl:

the 95%+ of people who have access to 24Mbps from FTTC could have had a AG node delivered to at most within 1 mile of their premises.

The original price list for FTTPoD says this:

In reference to www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/products/pricing/loadProductPriceDeta...:

96% of premises are expected to be within 2km of the nearest NGA Aggregation Node

Not far off your target.

In reply to a post by robert_fl:

OR presumably saved a couple of thousand pounds per cabinet by not extending the fibre in a future-proof way.

I guess it depends what is needed to be "future proof".

The most recent architecture diagram (visible in this blog) shows that the intention is to deploy BFT tubing between the AgNode and each splitter, and that one tube would carry an 8-fibre unit to feed the splitter node (4 for a fully-utilised node, with 4 spare, I imagine).

The current architecture for FTTC uses the same 7-tube BFT between AgNode and PCP. Each cabinet would use 1 tube, with a 4-fibre unit blown. The BFT could end up with 1 tube used of 7, but may also serve more than 1 cabinet (with "tube intercept joints" being used to extract a single tube in the footway chamber).

So, at the foot of the fancy new green cabinet, there may be up to 6 empty tubes, waiting for future fibre to be blown.

With each cabinet upgraded by BDUK tending to average 150-200 subscribers, it is likely that this could be covered by just 2 splitter nodes (128 subs each, but likely aiming at max 100), so needing just 2 tubes.

As FTTPoD gets deployed more, then future splitters may need extra BFT to be pulled between the AgNode and the cabinet's area - especially if the original one served multiple cabinets.

In reply to a post by robert_fl:

I really think this is fundamentally what the claw-back should at least try to achieve at a minimum. It seems risible that almost all FTTPod orders have to provide for several Km of fibre extra, so overbuilding pretty much what was done to provide fibre links to DSLAMs already on the route.

It could be done, at cost. Including the cost that BT ends up with a suboptimal network in the future (too many AgNodes, needing too much splicing). But remember that things aren't as straightforward as overbuilding "extra fibre" when empty BFT is being put in place.

My pricing went up by about £4K+VAT over the 3 year term.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I got the impression that under the old system only my property would be activated. Under the new system, 14 properties (including mine) would get FTTP. So I could consider it to be an expensive gift to the neighbours Or perhaps more accurately, an expensive gift to Openreach, who get to keep in perpetuity the infrastructure I'd have paid for.

I would *really* like to use the linked installs to share the cost with a neighbour or two.

The problem is that with Cerberus at least, it makes no sense financially: the neighbours who join in would have to pay £594 (inc VAT) setup *and* £120 per month for 12 months to Cerberus, whereas they'd pay something like £60 per month for BT Infinity 4 - and probably get £175 cashback too.

That difference is way more than the £700+VAT per PON discount for linked orders.

However if we don't link the orders, there's no guarantee that the properties who want it, get it. I know that 14 properties will be activated, but not which ones!

Maybe when BT Retail offer a fibre on demand product the finances will make more sense?

In reply to a post by candlerb:

The problem is that with Cerberus at least, it makes no sense financially: the neighbours who join in would have to pay £594 (inc VAT) setup *and* £120 per month for 12 months to Cerberus, whereas they'd pay something like £60 per month for BT Infinity 4 - and probably get £175 cashback too.

...

However if we don't link the orders, there's no guarantee that the properties who want it, get it. I know that 14 properties will be activated, but not which ones!

What you say makes sense.

It would be better, for your group of 14 homes, for one person to order FTTPoD, and the others to just wait for an FTTP service. The cheaper 13 could then agree to subsidise the 14th whose order triggered the work. This would be the cheapest way for 14 to act collectively and share the burden...

... But only if you know who the 14 are.

Question to those in the £39000 club:

If you don't know the approx distance to your nearest fibre aggregation node (ie you don't have a quote under the old pricing), do you at least know how far you are from your FTTC cab? Because if you are 1000s of metres away from your FTTC cabinet then its fair to say your agg node will also be 1000m+ away as FTTC cabs are usually not too far away from an agg node (generally speaking). So £39k may not be an unreasonable amount after all but to be sure you should obtain a quote from a different provider eg Fluidone.

An alternative would be if people already have FTTC then what speeds are they currently seeing - that would give some indication on distance from cab.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

The most recent architecture diagram (visible in this blog) shows that the intention is to deploy BFT tubing between the AgNode and each splitter, and that one tube would carry an 8-fibre unit to feed the splitter node (4 for a fully-utilised node, with 4 spare, I imagine).

That's an interesting article. What happened to FoD2?

The article talks about G.fast in chambers or on poles, with the G.fast node also carrying a splitter for use with FoD. I gather from this forum that such plans for G.fast have been abandoned, maybe because of the difficulty of powering them.

(It would of course be heaven: not only would many more people get top G.fast speeds on copper, but if they wanted genuine fibre they'd only have to pay for a short length of fibre to the nearby splitter).

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

With each cabinet upgraded by BDUK tending to average 150-200 subscribers, it is likely that this could be covered by just 2 splitter nodes (128 subs each, but likely aiming at max 100), so needing just 2 tubes.

So is the expected architecture that the primary splitters will reside in the PCP, or have their uplinks going via the PCP? Or is the topology of the fibre network going to be completely independent of the PCPs?

It makes me wonder why they didn't just put a splitter or two in each PCP in the first place, at the same time as connecting up the VDSL equipment.

Looking at the architecture diagram, I see secondary splitters uplinked into primary splitters which connect via the aggregation node back to the OLT.

It would be nice if OR would at least invest in installing the primary splitters, wherever they choose to locate them - it would make the cost of FTTPoD go down, and hence drive the takeup.

I think that if they made the connection charge for fibre something like £750 per property in areas served by a primary splitter, the demand would go way up, and the cost of the secondary splitter DPs to service them would soon be covered.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

It would be better, for your group of 14 homes, for one person to order FTTPoD, and the others to just wait for an FTTP service. The cheaper 13 could then agree to subsidise the 14th whose order triggered the work. This would be the cheapest way for 14 to act collectively and share the burden...

... But only if you know who the 14 are.

I live right at the end of a cul-de-sac. There are 25 properties, and the ducts clearly follow the pavement around the lollipop shape. So I'm pretty sure it will be all the properties on one side of the street, or the other - just not which

Perhaps for a little more money, I could get OR to activate the whole street...

In reply to a post by ian72:

An alternative would be if people already have FTTC then what speeds are they currently seeing - that would give some indication on distance from cab.

True, a rough distance to FTTC cab can be worked out from current FTTC stats. However bear in mind that FTTPoD is also available to those who are (or can be) connected to a FTTC cabinet but are too far (>3km?) to receive a usable FTTC service. In which case £10000's is perhaps not unreasonable to bring fibre to their doorstep.

Edited by deleted (Fri 09-Mar-18 14:43:10)

If someone is too far to get FTTC presently then that in itself gives us valuable information. With an install charge of £39K you would think they would be too far to get FTTC but the ag node could be a lot further away as has been said earlier. It may be that the desktop survey is wrong but if that is the case we will probably never know as few people are going to go ahead to pay for the full survey with such a high estimate.

Yes the topology of the fibre network is completely independent of the PCP. There's no fibre equipment (like splitters) kept in PCP's. They are usually in the chambers in the ground (sometimes right in front of the cabinets), or on telegraph poles.

I believe that architecture is now old. Certainly going forward for FTTP Openreach intend using the following, and I would imagine that they would adopt these elsewhere:

COF250 - 12 fibre SST (Standard Single Tube) oval cross sectional area (8mm x 4mm) with strength members to allow rodding. This is also the factory terminated tail cable on the CBTs (Connectorised Block Terminals).

COF215 - a small 36 fibre, 7mm dia. round cable originally designed as an Ultra Light Weight aerial cable, but can be used direct in duct with no additional sub-duct, or in 10/14mm sub-ducts. This will be used between aggregation nodes and splitter nodes, also between splitter nodes and intermediate joints both overhead and underground.

A single family of joint enclosures in small (12 tray), medium (24 tray), large (48 tray) and extra large (80 tray) replace the current enclosures, and what I've seen implies that there will only be a single level of split (1:32) downstream of the aggregation node, so a maximum of 32 clients sharing 2.5Gbps down / 1.25Gbps up.

In reply to a post by kingbiscit:

Yep, definitely bit suspicious us all getting the same quote!

Don't you think £39k is just their way of weeding out the tyre-kickers with minimal effort on their part. If people are serious, they will pay the £250 to get a proper quote.

Hi Andrew,

I read one of your posts from a few weeks back which mentioned the 1440 premises.

That got me thinking with regards to the Oakamoor exchange and I didn't think there would be more than one agg node. It would be money better spent elsewhere.

Is there a limit to the number of FTTC cabs on a node? I think there are 6 cabs plus the EO not yet built.

My £10600 quote is 1980m distance as the duct and poles run

With a huge figure of £39,000 it doesn't just weed people out - it permanently gets rid of them.

Thanks so much for the helpful response - I'm not a OR network expert by any means, so just looking at this in a very general way. The knowledge on this board is outstanding, so defer to greater knowledge.

Knowledge for us consumers = proper power.

The veil of mysteries about how the nation's key infrastructure is being built out and delivered (particularly where heavily subbed by central government) is a fascinating topic.

The original price list for FTTPoD says this:

In reference to www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/products/pricing/loadProductPriceDeta...:
96% of premises are expected to be within 2km of the nearest NGA Aggregation Node


Not far off your target.

Yes totally true, but the devil is in the detail as we're seeing here with high FTTPod quotes to end users, the extra quarter of a mile above my 1 mile suggestion costs on most plausible basis at a gross cost of more than £10k each to deliver.

Can it really be right in the long-run that initially the assumption is that 1,400 ish premises per Ag node will incur that cost to extend the network out (on current pricing)?

Wouldn't it have been better to anticipate that while extending the fibre network to each DSLAM, that using new hardware and remote distribution points it would make sense to use an architecture that was easily expandable?

The general point is that for every Ag node in non commercial areas there appears on the figures you quote to be around 4.5 cabinets at the moment. Each Ag node therefore has 4 or more links making their way deeper to end-user's premises, all of which has been incentivised by central government subsidy.

Having gone to all the trouble of clearing or building ducts to deliver "Fibre to the cabinet" - the question of how to get fibre to the last mile doesn't appeared to have been considered in any depth from a tax-payer's perspective.

BT's accounts say they have received a total of £1.1bn so far (running at ~£60m per quarter at present), but have earmarked £530m for return to the local authorities.

Other suppliers will be taking in money, but nowhere near as much as BT has accumulated since 2013. It really isn't billions.

I'm sure you're right, but in the spring budget the Chancellor has allocated £200m to be used to roll out full-fibre including the imminent £3,000 voucher scheme.

When you aggregate the £1.1m BT has received and assume that the £530m claw-back in that sum will probably largely be spent expanding OR's network & add onto that the £200m (which at £3k per premise = max 67k premises) - that's plausibly very close to having put £1.5bn into the OR network.

As people are clearly finding in this thread with ECC estimates, the £3,000 DCMS voucher will be swallowed entirely by OR bringing fibre effectively to the same or shorter distance to the shiny green cabinets a second time.

I'm personally not convinced that is a win for the treasury where they have already paid for network extension once. To the untrained eye this just looks like the government paying for the same thing twice in their procurement.

It's a given I'm a neophyte in understanding OR's fibre architecture, but the common sense approach as a lay-person is that the fibre itself is cheap whereas the civils to deliver it is expensive.

The civils have already been done to the cabinet once, so planning for each BDUK cabinet to have a chamber to provide for deeper network access seems like a no-brainer.

At least we know now that FTTP is maturing to the point that FTTC builds are a little limited in ambition (but as mentioned a very clever interim solution) then the clawback spend & voucher spend should be done first in such a way to make FTTP deliverable deeper into the network, rather than allowing OR's network to be grow randomly to serve first movers (at full cost).

I do accept that I may be simplifying what's going on, but then again it is clear that many on here have made the assumption that a DSLAM or FTTC cabinet would also be a logical point to start the point of measuring how you take Fibre deeper into the network. It is after all sold as 'Fibre to the Cabinet'.

Anecdotally I was told by one of the ISP's offering the new FTTPod pricing that they had nearly 400 people asking for quotes in total since the new scheme came into force. My guess is that a few thousand installs in the next year or so under the current regime is the most plausible take-up.

It will definitely change up again soon, when the inefficiency of OR's FTTPod offering becomes clear & there's no real alternative currently available.

So all of these quotes are before paying the £250? Has anyone paid the £250 and got a quote?

Just to chip in, here's my quote from Cerberus

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Build Cost: £8800.00 ex VAT
The build charge includes the estimate for the work and materials required to deliver the service. It also includes the connection charge.

Number of premises passed for FTTP: 8
The build estimate includes a reduction for the number of premises passed as these would be able to obtain FTTP as a consequence of your build. Customers at these premises may submit a linked FTTPoD order to share the construction costs. You will receive a discount of £700.00 ex VAT from this figure for each linked order that is served by your build. Linked orders may be submitted to Cerberus Networks at the customer�s own risk. If one order is cancelled this will cancel all the linked orders so you must find a way for all parties to work together to share any costs.

Please note that this is an estimated price based on network records. There are a number of factors that may affect the final costs. These would be only confirmed by a full survey once you place an order for the service.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FluidOne won't provide an estimate and my local supplier Spectrum (Cardiff) don't know their pricing yet although they have suggested the Welsh Government Ultrafast Connectivity
Voucher Scheme of £3k could help but it's to a residential not business although I do work from home a lot. I think the voucher scheme will be tough to get under these circumstances.

Worth noting I was previously in Band A under the old pricing.

Unsure if to just do they survey and see if it comes back any cheaper, I've asked Cerberus if in their experience the estimates have been way out but they are unwilling to comment at all

On the old scheme I was banded as H. It would cost approx 6-7K for the install and around £200 a month for 3 years (that quote was a few years ago when it first became available on the checker)
With this pricing whats the point in spending £250 for a quote as its just not feasible for me. I would be willing to pay around 3k install if I was only paying around £60 a month for full fibre.
I get around 16Mb down and 1Mb up on FTTC

Edited by deleted (Fri 09-Mar-18 18:15:31)

Why is treasury paying twice?

FoD is paying for the extension to your premise from the existing and paid for aggregation node. If a BDUK contract wanted to they could have specified and paid for FTTP construction beyond the aggregation node e.g. to the first splitter but what point would that have served?

Each order is going to be different for FoD, so until we actually see itemised quotes everyone is guessing based on the presumptions that BT is over charging.

Reality is that FoD takes a good number of hours and labour and it is this element that makes the civils behind a widespread FTTP roll-out expensive.

I'll be blunt, the low monthly cost meant plenty of people got so excited they missed the cautions about the cost and yes blowing or pulling/pushing depending on deployment method to get fibre 2km from an existing location is not going to be cheap. If it was cheap then you'd have other infrastructure operators biting your hand off to charge you half the same amount.

A lot of the problem is people forget how much it costs to employ people to things, and the extra costs of say working on a chamber in a road, i.e. not like one CityFibre contractor did of place 1 yellow cone and open chamber on a road.

FoD is very much for those who don't need the full SLA of a leased line and high monthly costs, but can accept a very high cost in my view. Or home owners at that point of spending £10k-£20k to move home for better broadband and see this as a way of not going through that hassle.

OK, assuming that the BT line follows the kerbline of the street to the FTTC cabinet, then my line is ~350m (plotted using https://www.gmap-pedometer.com/), and 240m as the crow flies.

I typically get just shy of 70Mbit down, and 18Mbit up. Recent speedtest for example:

,

I think these speeds fit with that distance.

We are at the far end of the estate. With the 1400(?) premises number mentioned elsewhere for aggregation nodes, my guess is that it is located where there are multiple cabinets nearer the entrance to the estate. This is more like 1.25km away by road (1km as the crow flies). It is a 1980's estate so no telegraph poles. Everything should be in ducts. I guess OR aren't confident the ducts are clear, hence the £39K.

The 5 properties passed still makes no sense however. Even from the local cabinet there are more properties than that!

In reply to a post by candlerb:

That's an interesting article. What happened to FoD2?

It's a way of building the network more than a new product. FoD2 at 1000/220 is available.

I believe you have misunderstood, these 14 (in your case) properties aren�t all provided with an FTTP service just because you ordered FTTPoD

..... it means it would be possible for them to order FTTP if they wish after your order has been fulfilled.

In reply to a post by AK0086:

I guess OR aren't confident the ducts are clear, hence the £39K.

The 5 properties passed still makes no sense however. Even from the local cabinet there are more properties than that!

I wish people would stop thinking this quote of £39,000 is from Openreach. We have no idea what Openreach quoted to Cerberus.

What we know is that it is a very suspicious coincidence that so many are identical, all of them from Cerberus. Am I right in thinking all to retail customers as far as they are concerned?

As has been suggested, it looks more like a "Please go away" figure from Cerberus. I can think of two possible reasons.

One, they may well have decided like FluidOne and BT Consumer that retail is not the place to be on this. The customers are far harder to deal with and the throughput requirements even after the service is up and running

Two, they may also have received many requests from business prospects, who long-term are the bread and butter of niche providers on all forms of broadband and phone services. They could well want to accommodate them within their backhaul network in preference to retail capacity-swampers.

Bear in mind they have to get the data through to their own routers somehow - are they in fact using BT Wholesale to get there? In which case maybe it is they who are bumping up the price depending on their own network in various places. Then from Cerberus's routers it has to link to the wider internet.

I agree the number of properties passed seems to be a random number. I wonder if that's a reflection of how many of the actual number passed are on LLU ADSL2+, or simply non-BT ADSL2+/FTTC.

Thank you for answering about the £39,000 figure earlier.

I was wondering, how much would it take OR to build more aggregation nodes compared to the cost of cabinets?

If OR are adding more fibre would it show up on the roadworks.org site?

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Reality is that FoD takes a good number of hours and labour and it is this element that makes the civils behind a widespread FTTP roll-out expensive.

Particulary if you connect properties one at a time rather that connecting everyone in an area. At £39k + VAT moving house might be cheaper. I do wonder what speeds those then get these quotes are able to connect at using DSL?

What cabinets, FoD does not require construction of cabinets

If some of the work requires notification e.g. closure of footpath, traffic lights, duct clearing then yes would appear on roadworks.org usually

NOTE Premises passed Is NOT a count of all the ones the fibre passes, but the number that would be served by the final PON element, so I'd expect figures between a couple and 32 usually

When is the £3,000 DCMS voucher scheme due to go national? With an estimate of £3900, it would cover a huge chunk of the cost.

I think that's very unlikely indeed. If Cerberus are adding a mark-up to the quotes, it will be a % or fixed amount. They won't just round all orders up to £39k.
All those £39k orders will most likely have been identical figures from OpenReach, with any mark-up from Cerberus being the same for all.

OpenReach did originally price this on fixed distance bands. Seems more likely all these users are in 1 of the higher bands, which is why the quotes are the same.

I can't see any logic to them driving away residential customers. That just makes absolutely no sense. A number of the lower quotes are for residential customers, and a couple of the £39k quotes were business customers.

The £39,000 quotes are suggested to be because the quoting system will not quote beyond £39k, so someone who proceeds to the paid survey which is more in depth will reveal the price which may be even higher.

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

I believe you have misunderstood, these 14 (in your case) properties aren�t all provided with an FTTP service just because you ordered FTTPoD

..... it means it would be possible for them to order FTTP if they wish after your order has been fulfilled.

Yes indeed. What I am assuming is that the other 13 properties: (a) will appear on the availability checker as "FTTP available", and (b) they will be able to order it at the normal install charge (i.e. OR wholesale £92+VAT). That charge would be most likely swallowed by the service provider, who may even give them a £175 pre-paid Mastercard

So it is an OpenReach thing, not a Cerberus conspiracy against a group of customers.

These quotes are likely customers who would be on the higher bands (furthest from the Agg Node).

Are you able to get any more specifics?

Edited by j0hn83 (Fri 09-Mar-18 22:58:42)

In reply to a post by Cammy:

Don't you think £39k is just their way of weeding out the tyre-kickers with minimal effort on their part. If people are serious, they will pay the £250 to get a proper quote.

Cynically, I would say the point of the survey is to find out whether Excess Construction Charges (ECC) will be payable on top of the original quote; I would be surprised if anyone ends up paying less. By this stage, the customer has effectively said that they're happy to pay the original price.

I would of course be delighted to be proved wrong.

Like others have pointed out, I think it's somewhat futile to guess actual costs until someone bites the bullet and gets the OR survey done

In reply to a post by Bill100:

Has anyone received a quote from Fluidone... it would be interesting to know what the difference is between their's and Cerberus's. I had a quote for £30k from Cerberus - ouch.

I just got a quote back from Amvia, which was for £13800 (compared to £13700 from Cerberus). They got my address wrong, using an address 3 doors down, which might explain the small difference. However, both quotes show 14 properties passed, and both have identical wording.

I don't actually know who Amvia are. They don't appear in the RIPE database, which makes me suspect they are a reseller of Cerberus or FluidOne. I've asked the question anyway.

Who wants to pay my consulting rates? Last place back in the 2000's it was £1,500 a day

Looks like im part of the £39K club as well (surprised me a lot with other FTTP in the area)

I am considering bitting the bullet with a full survey as I had the below quote with 4 potential properties I could link with.

"The estimated build price at this address is in excess of £39,000 + VAT. This basically means that it is at a level where the estimate is unreliable. We don't know if the figure is accurate at this stage. This is only something that can be confirmed at a full survey."

so having talked it over with them my understanding is that open reach are basically unsure on what to charge based on there records (which from conversations with engineers in the past aren't great for my area). However I may well wait 12 months to jump in for a quote incase all the new builds surrounding my area change anything plus there was what looked like new aggregation nodes being installed nearby as part of major roadworks and development a few roads away.

All

Just to provide a little clarity on a few points. (we have recently become a Cerberus reseller for the East Anglia region - and having been keeping a careful eye on how the new OpenReach terms affect reality on the ground),

First - please remember that the FTTPoD quotes we are all receiving are an 'estimate' based on a desktop survey with little knowledge of what really exists on the ground.

We saw the first batch of surveys return an average install cost of circa £15k, and the second batch an average of around £23k. These were substantial batches and averages should not deviate that much - which is a good indication that this is more likely an "add up all the possible numbers" approach than anything accurate.

We just placed the first 'paid for' survey request for a client and will see how this aligns with estimate (will post details when received). This would have been a band H install originally estimate at circa 10K or more.

As an example about "premises passed" - one desktop survey received advised that 1 building was passed. We know the industrial estate well - and you would have to pass 5 or more no matter what route you took to supply. The overall estate has around 40 units - so more likely that 10, 20 or more of these would be enabled.

We've asked for clarification around the implied £700 per site rebate on linked installs. The Openreach price guide advise a rebate of £700 per PON - not per site - and a single PON can get to up to 256 premises we believe if fully exploited.

Voucher Funding from DCMS LFFN Program - the initial test phase (Wave 1) covered 4 cities and allocated some £10m out of £200m budget.

Wave 2 is an allocation of £75M - £100M via local government initiatives to support local full fibre networks - see https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads...

I've been in touch with DCMS and our local borough council team and there is no visibility yet of any national voucher scheme. DCMS advised it would be summer before they looked further at this. Current focus is on getting decisions made re applications received for Wave 2 and implementing the successful applications.

Lastly, things are still emerging re the likely processes to be followed for 'linked installs' - how to get desktop surveys done for these and how to get the physical surveys actioned on the ground.

We expect more information on this later in the week - and again i will update when I know more.

Hope this provides a little clarity. I think it will be end of the month before we can see how the overall FTTPoD thing settles down.

If anyone is thinking of progressing - my advice is that is is safe to take the risk on the £250+VAT survey fee if for single business or premises - that is the only way to get an accurate cost - and you may well be able to talk to the BT Surveyor on the ground and get the real detail on what is going on locally.

If you need to get a linked install to make it work for you - I'd say wait a week or 2 until the dust settles and we see how this is all working out...

Edited by deleted (Sun 11-Mar-18 15:46:05)

Regarding a future voucher scheme for the whole of England, it sounds from https://beta.gov.wales/go-superfast/superfast-for-bu... that Wales already has one running. You might assume the English one might be similar to avoid a postcode lottery near the border.

There are specific differences. The trial in the 5 towns - 4 in England, 1 in Scotland was for LFFN - Local Full Fibre Network - and required deployment of technologies which would be Gigabit+ capable.

Last mile deployment over WiFi link was in theory also compliant as future WiFi links will be available at GBit+ speeds.

The Welsh scheme is different in that the eligibility is for 'Ultrafast' which is defined as 100/30 speeds.

Also, Welsh scheme allows for up to £10k of financial support - first £3k as 100% funded then remaining £7k as matched funding - so you would get the maximum £10k support on an install of £17k.

It is unlikely that DCMS LFFN Gigabit Voucher scheme will go beyond £3k support level, and it would probably be deployed UK wide.

My feeling is that the wireless element was only in there to avoid legal challenges

You may well be right Andrew.

There are a lot of WISPs in the market, and being cut out of a grant funding pot would not have gone down well.

The fact that the network needs to be Gigabit capable, but does not need to deliver more than 100 MBit immediately means that having a fibre backhaul and local WiFi distribution would have to be entertained as a viable option.

I spoke again to Amvia, and it transpires they are a reseller of Cerberus. They quoted £152+VAT per month for the service fee on a 12 month contract (as compared to Cerberus' £100+VAT).

Their salesperson said that there would be a £700 discount for each linked order, but was unable to say what the setup fee would be for the other orders.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

Their salesperson said that there would be a £700 discount for each linked order, but was unable to say what the setup fee would be for the other orders.

Companies selling these services need to get their skates on and be in a position to provide an accurate setup cost for potential linked orders.

Still waiting for my desk survey quote, and leaning towards paying for the proper survey afterwards, but if there are still a bunch of unknowns around linked order discounts etc that's going to be a pain.

£35,900 for me, in Band F. This from Cerberus. 3 premises passed.

I got a quote from FluidOne a few weeks ago - that was ~£5,500, but didn't get any ECCs surveyed.

I'll get the £250 'real survey' quote, which I do hope can come down as well as go up... I'm on a (short) private road (which I own) with poles all the way from the cabinet (I know it's the node which matters) so I am hoping a 'real' survey might be lower. Though I'd've thought OR's records would show the poles, so who knows.

I am assuming that the old structure upfront quote + ECCs + 3 years' sub will more or less equal the new structure 'real' quote + 1 year's sub. We'll see, and I'll now never know since I didn't get a quote for the ECCs under the old structure. I would have done if FluidOne had been willing to accept my business...

In reply to a post by markob101:

£35,900 for me, in Band F. This from Cerberus. 3 premises passed.

I got a quote from FluidOne a few weeks ago - that was ~£5,500, but didn't get any ECCs surveyed.

I'll get the £250 'real survey' quote, which I do hope can come down as well as go up... I'm on a (short) private road (which I own) with poles all the way from the cabinet (I know it's the node which matters) so I am hoping a 'real' survey might be lower. Though I'd've thought OR's records would show the poles, so who knows.

I am assuming that the old structure upfront quote + ECCs + 3 years' sub will more or less equal the new structure 'real' quote + 1 year's sub. We'll see, and I'll now never know since I didn't get a quote for the ECCs under the old structure. I would have done if FluidOne had been willing to accept my business...

Btw unlike the new system, under the old pricing structure the initial quotes were quite accurate, ie for the vast majority of orders the price remained unchanged after the survey (no ECCs applied).

Out of curiosity why were FluidOne happy to quote you £5.5k under the old pricing but unable to accept your business? (assuming you were willing to order before 23rd Feb)

Edited by deleted (Tue 13-Mar-18 10:26:56)

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

Out of curiosity why were FluidOne happy to quote you £5.5k under the old pricing but unable to accept your business? (assuming you were willing to order before 23rd Feb)

They wanted the order to come not only through a company but from a live business.

I don�t run my own business, but I was willing to set up a shelfco to face FluidOne and either pay them direct or pay them through the company. They insisted on a couple of months� �trading history� - I said it would never have any �trading history� as I was just setting it up for this purpose and had no other business to put through it. I offered to support the company with a PG (which would have been much more valuable than two months� trading of a new company) but they were adamant it needed to be a �real� business. Alternatively, I wouldn�t have minded paying some amount upfront into an escrow account.

I wish I�d pushed it a bit harder - if I�d managed to speak to someone sensible on the credit risk side I feel sure we�d have been able to come to terms - but I didn�t think the price differential would be so significant as it now appears it might be.

In reply to a post by markob101:

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

Out of curiosity why were FluidOne happy to quote you £5.5k under the old pricing but unable to accept your business? (assuming you were willing to order before 23rd Feb)

They wanted the order to come not only through a company but from a live business.

I don�t run my own business, but I was willing to set up a shelfco to face FluidOne and either pay them direct or pay them through the company. They insisted on a couple of months� �trading history� - I said it would never have any �trading history� as I was just setting it up for this purpose and had no other business to put through it. I offered to support the company with a PG (which would have been much more valuable than two months� trading of a new company) but they were adamant it needed to be a �real� business. Alternatively, I wouldn�t have minded paying some amount upfront into an escrow account.

I wish I�d pushed it a bit harder - if I�d managed to speak to someone sensible on the credit risk side I feel sure we�d have been able to come to terms - but I didn�t think the price differential would be so significant as it now appears it might be.

A real bummer you weren't able to order through FluidOne

Moving forward, as you say your best bet is to proceed with the survey through Cerberus and pray that the cost of 35k isn't a true reflection of the work req'd and is significantly reduced.

Edited by deleted (Tue 13-Mar-18 13:14:57)

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

In reply to a post by markob101:

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

Out of curiosity why were FluidOne happy to quote you £5.5k under the old pricing but unable to accept your business? (assuming you were willing to order before 23rd Feb)

They wanted the order to come not only through a company but from a live business.

I don�t run my own business, but I was willing to set up a shelfco to face FluidOne and either pay them direct or pay them through the company. They insisted on a couple of months� �trading history� - I said it would never have any �trading history� as I was just setting it up for this purpose and had no other business to put through it. I offered to support the company with a PG (which would have been much more valuable than two months� trading of a new company) but they were adamant it needed to be a �real� business. Alternatively, I wouldn�t have minded paying some amount upfront into an escrow account.

I wish I�d pushed it a bit harder - if I�d managed to speak to someone sensible on the credit risk side I feel sure we�d have been able to come to terms - but I didn�t think the price differential would be so significant as it now appears it might be.

A real bummer you weren't able to order through FluidOne

Moving forward, as you say your best bet is to proceed with the survey through Cerberus and pray that the cost of 35k isn't a true reflection of the work req'd and is significantly reduced.

I never dreamt of a £30k uplift. In fact, I started discussion with FluidOne in February, having assumed the new prices would be designed to encourage people to do OR's build-out for them. Getting a quote under the old structure was unexpected.

I thought the whole idea would be that people who cared about it more/had deeper pockets would pay effectively to gift the neighbourhood native FTTP, and OR would meet you halfway(ish) in acknowledgement of the fact that it's helping defray their build-out costs. Bearing in mind also that a lot of these requests are going to be in areas below the 2020 USO where there will have to be some infrastructure development at someone's cost anyway, and where the commercial incentives are blunted. I'm interested not because of a possible change from 80 down to 300 down, but because of the need for a change from ~4 down to [anything above 4!] down!

Disappointing that we are being priced away.

In reply to a post by markob101:

I thought the whole idea would be that people who cared about it more/had deeper pockets would pay effectively to gift the neighbourhood native FTTP,

Well technically that is the idea, it's just that sadly we're gonna need much deeper pockets than first hoped for it seems. That said, if paid surveys indicate it's possible to do builds at a lower cost than initial surveys it might not be so bad for some. Glass half full and all that...

My Cerberus order is in.

Their terms and conditions state:

3.3.2.7 After the survey has been completed, then Cerberus will deem the order to have reached KCI2. Cerberus will determine the Excess Construction Charges (�ECCs�) that will be due to complete the order, additional to the Estimated Build Cost. Cerberus will provide notice of these charges to the Customer in writing. If the Customer does not confirm acceptance of the ECCs in writing within 28 days, then Cerberus will cancel the order. The Survey Charge will not be refunded.

So the contract doesn't allow for the possibility of a reduction after survey.

I guess we'll see over the coming weeks - especially if someone bites the bullet on one of those £39K installs...

So I just paid off my entire remaining contract. I now will have no invoice from Cerberus till Jan 2021

My total cost including installation and line rental came to:

£9528

£2400 - install
£594 - first quarter rental
£6534 - remaining rental for contract (33 months)

Works out about £270 a month for 36 months

All prices are inclusive of VAT.

So this should put into perspective what the cost should roughly be.

Edited by Snake (Tue 13-Mar-18 20:45:51)

Can I ask what band you were in, and whether there were any ECCs?

Under the old scheme, band B (200-399m) had an Openreach distance charge of £1050+VAT and a £750+VAT installation fee, making £1800+VAT = £2160, which seems the closest to what you paid.

I was Band B, don't know the official distance, but i know where the aggregation node is and I would say around 300/400m

There were no ECC's. I had blocked ducts and the telephone pole needed replacing.

In reply to a post by Snake:

So I just paid off my entire remaining contract. I now will have no invoice from Cerberus till Jan 2021

My total cost including installation and line rental came to:

£9528

£2400 - install
£594 - first quarter rental
£6534 - remaining rental for contract (33 months)

Works out about £270 a month for 36 months

All prices are inclusive of VAT.

So this should put into perspective what the cost should roughly be.

Your contract was under the old pricing scheme, is that correct?

Yes that is correct. I just wanted to give real numbers so people could compare.

I also don't think Cerberus is making anything up. They came to the market with a cheaper FTTPoD offering and thee was a lot of rumors flying about how there pricing can't be real etc...

It seems with the latest announcement by OR that they have been 'constraining' FoD ISP's and restricting all of them to only 20 FoD orders per month.

At first I thought it was the ISP's rationing FoD orders, especially with the £39,000 figure we saw a lot.

I publically apologise to Cerberus for calling them out earlier in the thread.

In reply to a post by bowdon:

It seems with the latest announcement by OR that they have been 'constraining' FoD ISP's and restricting all of them to only 20 FoD orders per month.

At first I thought it was the ISP's rationing FoD orders, especially with the £39,000 figure we saw a lot.

I publically apologise to Cerberus for calling them out earlier in the thread.

Back in Feb 2017 when FluidOne were the only ISP selling FoD, they were taking around 10 orders each month (they told me this). With the new pricing structure making it arguably more expensive, this won't change much so perhaps max of 20 FoD orders per month is a fair limit set by Openreach - they have to set a limit as they don't have unlimited resources/manpower. I presume the 20 orders is NOT per ISP, its the accumulated FoD orders from all ISPs.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

My Cerberus order is in.

Their terms and conditions state:

3.3.2.7 After the survey has been completed, then Cerberus will deem the order to have reached KCI2. Cerberus will determine the Excess Construction Charges (�ECCs�) that will be due to complete the order, additional to the Estimated Build Cost. Cerberus will provide notice of these charges to the Customer in writing. If the Customer does not confirm acceptance of the ECCs in writing within 28 days, then Cerberus will cancel the order. The Survey Charge will not be refunded.

So the contract doesn't allow for the possibility of a reduction after survey.

I guess we'll see over the coming weeks - especially if someone bites the bullet on one of those £39K installs...

So total install cost is the estimate plus any ECCs?

In reply to a post by donkay:

So total install cost is the estimate plus any ECCs?

Yes. Here is a larger extract from the FTTPoD T&Cs:

3.3.2 The cost of activation will vary according to the location of the premises and other factors, and the following steps and conditions will apply.

3.3.2.1 FTTP on Demand infrastructure is built in response to an order.

3.3.2.2 Upon initial quotation, or ordering via a web portal, Cerberus will quote an initial Installation charge, known as the �Estimated Build Cost�. The Estimated Build Cost will be provided via email to the Customer after Cerberus� suppliers have carried out a desk-based survey based on network records.

3.3.2.3 Upon receiving an order for the Service from the Customer, Cerberus will commission a �Full Survey� to take place prior to the commencement of any provisioning work. The customer agrees to pay the charge for this survey, known as the �Survey Charge� at the time of order.

3.3.2.4 The Survey Charge is non-refundable, unless Cerberus cancels the order prior to the Full Survey taking place, which it may do at its own discretion.

3.3.2.5 If the order proceeds, either from an order on a web portal or via written acceptance of a quotation (and any payment of the Survey Charge specified by Cerberus according to 3.3.2.3), then Cerberus will deem the order to have reached KCI1.

3.3.2.6 The supplier will perform the Full Survey to assess the building and cabling work to deliver the Service. Cerberus will arrange a mutually acceptable time and location for the survey between the Customer and its supplier. If the Customer cannot provide access within 6 weeks of the Order, them Cerberus reserves the right to cancel the order and the Survey Charge will not be refundable. Cerberus provides no warranties or targets for the lead time for such survey or for the return of its findings. Note, any costs incurred due to the failure by the Customer or its representative or agent to cause an aborted survey, due to lack of access, personnel or attendance, at the appointed survey place and time, shall be the Customer�s liability.

3.3.2.7 After the survey has been completed, then Cerberus will deem the order to have reached KCI2. Cerberus will determine the Excess Construction Charges (�ECCs�) that will be due to complete the order, additional to the Estimated Build Cost. Cerberus will provide notice of these charges to the Customer in writing. If the Customer does not confirm acceptance of the ECCs in writing within 28 days, then Cerberus will cancel the order. The Survey Charge will not be refunded.

3.3.2.8 If, after notification of the ECCs by Cerberus, the Customer agrees to proceed with the order in writing, then the order will proceed and the Customer will have no automatic right to cancel the order at no further cost.

3.3.2.9 Cerberus may request immediate payment of the Estimated Build Cost and the ECCs to proceed with the Order. If the Customer fails to pay the Estimated Build Cost and ECCs as requested by Cerberus, then Cerberus may cancel the order and the Customer will not be due a refund of the Survey Charge.

There was also an AUP and a SLA.

Little hope of estimates coming down in any significant way then, very disappointing. Like others have said, I should have tried harder to sign up before the price change. But as a residential customer, FluidOne wouldn't take me and Cerberus wouldn't sign me up to a 3 year contract as it was against OfCom rules.

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

Back in Feb 2017 when FluidOne were the only ISP selling FoD, they were taking around 10 orders each month (they told me this).

Before the pricing change, I got a quote from FluidOne. Their monthly service fee was £320+VAT on a 3-year contract, i.e. £11,520+VAT on top of the build charges. That was enough to put me off.

The Cerberus cost was £165+VAT for 3 years - about half of FluidOne - which I imagine lead to higher demand.

I'm curious as to why you'd choose to fully pay up the whole contract up front.
Do they have clauses in their contract that would allow them to raise prices mid-contract or something?

If I can please intervene here and cast some light on this. (We're a Cerberus reseller, so will have a better understanding of their T&Cs than most).

Let's start with the £39k bit - that is the maximum which BT Wholesale / Openreach will estimate for Excess Construction Charges (ECCs), and probably has little bearing on the work which really needs to be done on the ground.

A properly costed and binding quote can only be achieved by requesting a formal BT Survey, and the details returned from this can be cross checked and validated by the reseller to ensure they match the work needed on the ground.

Unlike what was previously the norm for Leased Lines, these surveys are not free - and the charge is £250 plus VAT from Cerberus. The actual wholesale charge by BT is £245.14 - so Cerberus round up by £4.86 (wow!!!) and get a few quid to cover their admin costs.

BT could not be expected to do free surveys considering the relative cost of an FTTPoD line compared to a much higher revenue Leased Line (BT Staff do have to get paid as well!).

The Install Cost (also known as the ECCs) will be quoted by BT - and at that stage, the client will have 30 days to accept the quote and proceed - otherwise the quote will lapse.

That actual install cost payable will be based only on the costs advised by the BT Surveyor - not the original desktop survey (which has no commercial validity whatsoever).

This final cost quoted by BT will have taken into account ECCs to run the fibre, the install charge from BT and will have deducted the rebate due for 'Premises Passed' and for the original survey charge. (note to all: "Premises Passed" is a poor description - it actually means premises which will be enabled for connection from the Passive Optical Network Connection installed network - and the fibre could pass a thousand premises on route which will not be able to benefit from connection)

No one is sure yet exactly how multi premise 'linked installs' will work, or if the standard survey process will apply (i.e. one survey costs for all premises). Cerberus are still talking to BT to get clarity on this and other aspects of liked install contracts.

I do agree that the Cerberus T&C wording is a bit vague in areas, and when we reviewed the T&Cs as part of becoming a reseller, we picked up on several areas of text for improvement (including this), and advised the Cerberus sales team and directors of these. We've had confirmation that they will be changed in next version - but there is little point in them rushing out a point change immediately when we expect to still see substantially more detail emerge from BT which will need to be reflected in the documents over the coming weeks.

It's easy to be critical of Cerberus or indeed any of the FTTPoD suppliers or reseller, but they are having to deal with a lot of change at the BT end right now.

Also, please remember that FTTPoD to date has been a niche product, with quite a small BT Team involved behind the scenes. They are under intense pressure to deploy a labour intensive desktop survey system and work out how to handle linked installs with limited resources (compared to the mainstream broadband teams).

As I've mentioned in other posts - best we all just wait a few more weeks and let the dust properly settle.

If anyone needs more information or has any other questions, please post or PM me.

Right, time for my dinner...

Basically, I lost my Job in December and so I was thinking of cancelling all together and most likely losing out on the install cost. However I decided to stick with it and got a new contract in January. I decided that I might as well pay it all off now so that I don't have to worry about it at all. Now I don't need to worry about internet bill for 2 years and 9 months

There is nothing in the contract that states price can change without prior notice and agreement (pretty standard).

I am not sure how many people took the offer, everyone was skeptical, I think I might actually be the first FTTPoD customer (maybe GenuineCerberus - can confirm ).

I know Mamba ordered around the same time.

This may be one of those questions that show my total lack of understanding on all of this.

But Openreach have shown they clearly do not really want to do the groundwork for FTTPod and are trying to do all they can to discourage its take up.

This means Cerberus have a nightmare situation on getting this setup and people are paying crazy amounts when they do.

But and this is my question. From what I understand there are two ISPs who are prepared to do the groundwork and install FTTP cabling on demand. One is Openreach and the other is Virgin Media.

Couldn't Cerberus, as opposed to trying to deal with Openreach who from all the news coming out do not want to know, instead try and secure somekind of deal with Virgin Media so customers in effect pay virgin to get their cable installed to their property and you get Virgin cable internet paid through Cerebrus as a reseller like they are doing with BT wholesale.

Edited by Anth (Wed 14-Mar-18 19:52:25)

Virgin don't have a wholesale service, nor do they offer an on demand install service. So I think that idea is out on both counts.

Thanks for explanation. Good luck with new contract and keep enjoying that FTTPoD worry free.

Cerberus sell products over the OpenReach network.
This is a very niche product, not aimed at mass market.

Virgin have no On Demand product. If they aren't in your area, tough luck. You can't pay them to run their Fibre to you.

Virgin also don't Wholesale their network like OpenReach do. Cerberus can't sell Virgin products, or anything over the Virgin network.

Unlike what was previously the norm for Leased Lines, these surveys are not free - and the charge is £250 plus VAT from Cerberus. The actual wholesale charge by BT is £245.14 - so Cerberus round up by £4.86 (wow!!!) and get a few quid to cover their admin costs.

Has the norm also changed for leased lines? My client has just had the Openreach survey done through BT but BT's pricing is not competitive at all. Most of the quotes from other ISPs are coming in £200/month cheaper with zero set-up costs for 50Mbps. Just wondered if BT will try to charge my client if they go with somebody else?

I have Virgin cable available and have looked occasionally at their broadband packages but it seems poor value with slow upload speeds and many reports of peak time congestion. I pay £27 pm for Plusnet FTTC and get 80/20 with low latency. With Virgin that would get me the bottom Vivid 50 tier with a 5 Mbps upload. Even the top Vivid 200/300 tiers only have 20 Mbps upload. If I went for FTTP it would be to get higher upload speeds (e.g. 50Mbps) and low latency.

http://www.virginmedia.com/shop/broadband/speeds.html

Edited by brookheather (Wed 14-Mar-18 20:16:47)

In reply to a post by RIO_Colm:

It's easy to be critical of Cerberus or indeed any of the FTTPoD suppliers or reseller, but they are having to deal with a lot of change at the BT end right now.

I just want to say: I have no criticism of Cerberus at all. Their service so far - pre-order and very early order stages - has been first class. They've answered questions promptly and clearly, and at the moment they are chasing BT/Openreach daily (who have not yet acknowledged the order)

No, certainly not to my knowledge. All Leased Line installations are (in theory) subject to Excess Construction Charges, and surveys for same have always been free of charge.

Technically, the survey is only carried out when you place the actual order, and is required to give you a committed as opposed to an indicative price.

You have the contractual right to cancel the order at that stage as you cannot logically enter into a contract where the terms of the contract are unknown up front.

Please check if your client has actually had an installation survey done, or have they just received a quote from BT (sounds more like the latter unless you have actually placed the order).

Quotes are typically given for 1, 3 or 5 year periods, and it is common that 3 / 5 year contract periods will be lower monthly cost (but longer term revenue for the provider) and that they will bundle the installation cost into the quote - in effect just using some of the real long term discount to pay off the install costs in 36 or 60 months. Just a clever sales trick really.

That quote will be marked somewhere as 'subject to survey' which as where a field surveyor from BT or Virgin go and work out how much extra you will be charged to run the actual fibre. Think of the install; charge as being the activation fee to commission the circuit, and the ECCs as the physical costs of supply of the fibre, ductwork, road closures and digs, holes in walls etc.

Edited by deleted (Wed 14-Mar-18 20:51:51)

Thanks, let me know if you have any other questions

That is understood and apologies if I mistakenly implied that you were being critical - which was never my intention.

I kind of sit between clients on one side and the main ISPs like Cerberus on the other and I can full understand just how frustrating this whole process is for most people.

It is only human that we expect the ISPs to be highly knowledgeable and to get everything right, and to show frustration when they don't get the message right for whatever reason.

As a reseller, knowing this stuff is my day job, and I am constantly talking to our ISP partners like Cerberus, our local SuperFastEssex team and DCMS / Local Government about funding options, and also to BT when required. And googling the living daylights out of everything I cannot understand to boot!

I know more than most, but still nowhere near enough, but what I do see is that the whole FTTPoD space is still very immature and rapidly evolving. Even the experts like Cerberus are running to keep up - and I speak to them almost daily.

The main advantage of this forum is that we have an avenue to communicate and share knowledge & experience. If we keep doing that - then we should come out the other side relatively unscathed.

Edited by deleted (Wed 14-Mar-18 20:53:10)

Please check if your client has actually had an installation survey done, or have they just received a quote from BT (sounds more like the latter unless you have actually placed the order).

The survey has definitely been done as I went over to meet the Openreach engineer Had a look at his plans and discussed the potential installation. Even have the Openreach project code. Measured up the road, checked two-way lights could be used, took pictures etc. Next step he said was for a project manager to put the final costs together.

My client did sign something but as you say, you can't be expected to enter into a contract until all the costs are known.

Think of the install; charge as being the activation fee to commission the circuit, and the ECCs as the physical costs of supply of the fibre, ductwork, road closures and digs, holes in walls etc.

Understood - it's Openreach who have incured the costs of the survey, not BT and they'll get the work no matter which ISP my client goes with. And it's pretty much going to happen assuming something unexpected doesn't turn up when the project manager looks into it, i.e. the install costs will be acceptable and the monthly price is within budget.

If this goes ahead, I've got a fun intra-building networking job with my electrician friend. Bit of UBNT bridging here, some underground cabling there and a medley of access points.

I have Virgin cable available and have looked occasionally at their broadband packages but it seems poor value with slow upload speeds]

I get 200Mbps+ consistently and I'm in a dense population area inc. a lot of terraced housing, i.e. potentially lots of contention. To be honest, at that speed, contention is a non-issue. I get phone, basic TV & 220Mbps internet for £50/month. Worth the extra £20 for me for the speed of internet as I work from home a lot and of course, I'm getting basic TV and a rather nice Tivo box as well. I've been with NTL and then Virgin for 15 years and the service has been rock solid - touch wood. The new Superhub 3 is a pretty decent Wi-Fi device as well.

The upload speed could do with a bit of a tweak maybe but I get 16Mbps upload. Here's a test I've just done now at 22:20:

http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/d/a32ef5ea-cd56-4...

and many reports of peak time congestion

As I said, never noticed it myself.

I pay £27 pm for Plusnet FTTC and get 80/20 with low latency. With Virgin that would get me the bottom Vivid 50 tier with a 5 Mbps upload.

Yes probably doesn't compare when you're in the lucky situation of being so close to the cabinet (which you must be to get 80Mbps). Many people aren't so lucky and if they have cable, the price markup for more speed is worth paying for.

Even the top Vivid 200/300 tiers only have 20 Mbps upload

Indeed but honestly, that's never been a problem *and* I run a small development web server over it. Uploading is still a small percentage of the overall data.

Latency over the Virgin network has always been excellent. I only tend to see <10ms ping times over leased lines.

And not a few years ago, people would have killed for 20Mbps upload! But yes, FTTP will be an obvious competitor for Virgin but at the moment FTTP prices from Zen are more than Virgin albeit with a higher upload speed - £52 for 150/30 and £77 for 300/50. And you don't get TV and Tivo for that price.

Edited by deleted (Wed 14-Mar-18 22:35:18)

In reply to a post by RIO_Colm:

Think of the install; charge as being the activation fee to commission the circuit, and the ECCs as the physical costs of supply of the fibre, ductwork, road closures and digs, holes in walls etc.

This may well apply to the installs under the new pricing but under the old FTTPoD pricing structure, ECCs were classed as unforeseen charges (hence the name excess construction charges) and didn't apply to the vast majority of orders after the survey. There's a guy (mumba) on the Cerberus order thread who had 18 blocked ducts during his FTTPoD install and Openreach charged him zero in ECCs. Though I don't think blocked ducts will show up at the survey stage, its only once OR start test rodding ducts they come to light.

Edited by deleted (Thu 15-Mar-18 05:04:56)

Hi

What I don't understand is why OpenReach are passing on what seemingly is the full cost of installation, and I suspect the pricing includes a profit and contingency for them as well. Once installed does the customer own that fibre? No, it's an asset of OpenReach, and a freely obtained one at that. For £39K I'd also expect some shares in the company, as essentially that is what we are doing, investing into OpenReach.

We can get a telephone line installed for a few hundred pounds no matter where we live or how far from the exchange, is fibre really that much more expensive?

As for properties passed and discounts, essentially that's nothing but snake oil as there appears to be no way of utilising that discount,as people aren't told of the properties passed to knock on the door and get them on board, and it takes just one to drop out for the whole discount to be removed, why not just remove £700 for each one that drops out if OpenReach were serious about it? Obviously they are not.

Something needs to be done about OpenReach, they are making healthy profits and making a few people rich, whilst our telephone and data network creeks on old POTs.

Regards

Phil

The fibre is a very small part of the asset - the majority of the cost will be in people time and therefore if a customer wants it they pay for it - or they wait until a point where BT choose to do it off their own bat.

Telephone lines are covered by USO - but even then if there are costs above about £3000 then the customer pays the excess costs.

Edited by ian72 (Thu 15-Mar-18 09:08:51)

Hi

The fibre is a very small part of the asset - the majority of the cost will be in people time and therefore if a customer wants it they pay for it - or they wait until a point where BT choose to do it off their own bat.

Whilst the cost of the actual material fibre itself might be cheap, the asset isn't just the material, its made up of all the costs associated with installing it and is essentially its potential value to the company in terms of profit. So a £20K install, if that is covering all or most of OpenReach's costs, then on their balance sheet they have gained an asset worth around £20K or even more, without investing anything. That represents an investment by the customer, they should get shares. Remember that the fibre installed doesn't belong to the person/company who paid for it, and OpenReach are free to resell it to other customers, profiting even more. They even have the cheek to dangle the carrot of a £700.00 discount per each other customer we get to sign up, getting us to do all the sales work for them as well!

Just as well its only 20 orders a month, as if it was a lot more than that people would be raising serious questions over the whole scheme.

Regards

Phil

I thought I'd join in and get a quote. and like many others, it is "in excess of £39,000".

What I can't get my head around, is that an Openreach engineer is on around £27k a year.

I live on a long straight road, and the fibre would apparently pass 9 properties. So it's either left, or right. The properties are right next to one another, thus the longest distance this can be is 200m (in a straight line, left as it happens is the longest).

Surely a single engineer could run this fibre, given a year to do it, so how on earth do they justify the price?

EDIT: There are properties on both sides of the street, so the distance may in fact be much shorter.
I must be missing something, but come one...

Edited by AndyPandy (Thu 15-Mar-18 10:37:56)

PhilipD

The actual cost of the fibre is a very small proportion of the £1000s Openreach charge for FTTPoD. Its the cost of getting that fibre into the ground or onto poles (ie labour cost) which makes up the largest % of overall costs. Replacing overhead poles, installing new ducts, clearing ducts etc are all very expensive and time consuming tasks. Often Openreach will use contractors for Civil works who themselves charge a small fortune.

Yes Openreach own the fibre once you've paid for it, however they are also responsible for maintaining it and to repair any breaks during its lifetime - which they don't charge the end user for. Perhaps if they passed ownership of fibre to the end user, then its only fair to also pass the responsibility/costs of maintaining it to the end user? How many FoD customers would be happy with such an arrangement? I certainly wouldn't...

Edited by deleted (Thu 15-Mar-18 11:13:05)

Hi

The actual cost of the fibre is a very small proportion of the £1000s Openreach charge for FTTPoD. Its the cost of getting that fibre into the ground or onto poles (ie labour cost) which makes up the largest % of overall costs. Replacing overhead poles, installing new ducts, clearing ducts etc are all very expensive and time consuming tasks. Often Openreach will use contractors for Civil Works who themselves charge a small fortune.

Yet OpenReach maintain all the telephone cables and exchanges, install ADSL/FTTP/VDSL/G.Fast and all the backhaul required without charging a single customer "in excess of £39,000" for any of those connections and are still making very healthy profits.

My point is it seems very expensive, if those costs were true for everything OpenReach installs then we'd be conversing by telegram still.

Yes I understand the economies of scale that applies to the vast majority of the network that may not completely apply to a single one off order for fibre on demand, however some of it still does, i.e. they have systems in place and people with the knowledge and skills, deals with contractors and suppliers etc, not to mention that fibre is much further out than it ever used to be, and once installed its passing other properties they could sell a connection to, not to mention it's upgrading the network they would only be having to do at some point.

Essentially OpenReach are still profiting from someone else's investment into flooding the UK with telephone cable some 80 odd years ago and connecting up virtually every property, and are very reluctant to invest again in renewing it all, and that's what we get for OpenReach being a private company.

FTPoD is priced high as they don't want to do it, they've been forced to offer something, but within the charge is a very high admin cost for the fact we can demand it, with no contribution from OpenReach to the cost even though they get to keep it wholly as their own asset.

Regards

Phil

In reply to a post by PhilipD:

Essentially OpenReach are still profiting from someone else's investment into flooding the UK with telephone cable some 80 odd years ago and connecting up virtually every property, and are very reluctant to invest again in renewing it all, and that's what we get for OpenReach being a private company.

You think it would get done if it were renationalised?

How much cable/infrastructure installed 80 years ago do you think it still there? I suspect it is a bit like Trigger's broom.

In the end either a customer waits for BT to rollout a service or they pay to get the service early. BT profits aren't massive on FTTP and so absorbing high engineering costs for somewhere that they may not otherwise install for 10 years is not a good business model. And has already been said it is no different to the way other utilities work - you want a utility to your house you pay for the installation and the costs can be very high even where infrastructure is not that far away.

That's a good point. For leased lines, you typically get quoted an install charge early on which is (I believe) based on distance to the closest POP, then ECCs are for any unforeseen works - just had a 10 GB Virgin leased line quoted at £40k install before any survey at all.

FTTPoD is different - the so called install charge quoted by Openreach really covers the circuit activation and the entire install cost can only be given accurately from paid survey.

Mumba's case is interesting. That order was under the old 'fixed price install based on distance band' model, and although Openreach has the 'right' to charge further ECCs under that scheme, Cerberus advised me that they never came across a situation where they did so - or even mentioned anything about ECCs.

I suspect that someone forgot to mention that clause to the OR Surveyors and they just thought they were on fixed porice install regardless.

Longest distance? So only 200m from your aggregation node?

Once you add employees NI contribution, pension elements, cost of training, cost of vehicles, planners, etc etc the costs even when you don't include any fibre elements start to rack up.

I predict that if people continue the 'I thought I'd join in and get a quote' that you may find retailers taking a deposit upfront, or Openreach just stopping quoting.

Hi

I have no idea if it would or wouldn't, but at least the profits could be re-invested.

We could swing the question around, do you think we'd all have telephone wires to our houses as soon or as consistently as we do if it wasn't for the existence of General Post Office?

With private companies the only way of ensuring everyone gets some sort of connection regardless of the profitability has needed legislation in the form of a USO. Private companies left to their own devices where profit is their only driver is not in the best interests of any sort of national infrastructure, that's why legislation exists and OpenReach is now broken away from BT. Is this overall a better option than full nationalisation, I don't know, but we had no problems getting a telephone line under the GPO I seem to recall, which was a brand new line. In comparison in 2016, to reconnect a house we moved into to a telephone line that was already at the property, was a month wait for a job that took no more than 5 minutes! Even then they missed the original appointment!

Regards

Phil

I wonder how much a phone line cost in the first 10 years of them being rolled out? I wonder how many people took up the service in the first 10 years? How much money was provided by the taxpayer to get telephone lines to the population? I don't have answers to these questions but it is that sort of information you would need to get even close to comparing telephone line under GPO to fibre under Openreach.

So what about those needed to plan the task, provide routing for the fibre, build its virtual paths, supply the tools, service the vehicle, handle the order from the CP, etc, etc, etc ..

It just isn�t as simplistic as you claim.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/289158/telephone...

Throws some numbers at the topic

Sale of BT announced in 1982 actual first public share sale took place in 1984 with remaining shares sold in 1991 and 1993

In reply to a post by RIO_Colm:

That's a good point. For leased lines, you typically get quoted an install charge early on which is (I believe) based on distance to the closest POP, then ECCs are for any unforeseen works - just had a 10 GB Virgin leased line quoted at £40k install before any survey at all.

FTTPoD is different - the so called install charge quoted by Openreach really covers the circuit activation and the entire install cost can only be given accurately from paid survey.

Mumba's case is interesting. That order was under the old 'fixed price install based on distance band' model, and although Openreach has the 'right' to charge further ECCs under that scheme, Cerberus advised me that they never came across a situation where they did so - or even mentioned anything about ECCs.

I suspect that someone forgot to mention that clause to the OR Surveyors and they just thought they were on fixed porice install regardless.

The Openreach Surveyor who did my FoD survey back in April 2017 was fully aware of ECCs under the old pricing structure. He confirmed verbally to me (unofficially) that ECCs wouldn't apply to my build and they only applied in cases where major additional work was required such as excavation on a public highway to install a new u/g duct. Also i think FluidOne informed me that Openreach covered the costs of the first 1K or so of ECCs, so minor additional work was not charged for under the old pricing.

I wonder if Openreach came to the conclusion that wrt installation costs, the old pricing model did not accurately reflect the work req'd on the ground? In other words a more detailed breakdown of costs was req'd rather than just providing a figure based on radial distance to nearest aggregation node.

Hi

I think the point is the costs seem very inflated. Openreach themselves have estimated it could cost £300-£600 per premise passed as part of their FTTP rollout to 10 million premises, so to then quote something like £39,000 for a single connection just seems a lot of money where a good chunk of costs are fixed, and Openreach keep the connection as an asset and benefit at some point in the future from that deployment passing x number of properties.

(Source: https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2017/12/openre...

Of course they will cherry pick their FTTP rollout to the areas that are the cheapest to deploy to so reducing the cost, but the costs to plan, routing, virtual paths, tools, vehicles etc are similar.

Basically FTPoDemand is priced high to reduce the demand, as Openreach don't want to do it, they'd rather their resources were coordinated towards a larger rollout of FTTP where they can pick the area that will provide the most lucrative returns, that's understandable, it's a private company after all.

Regards

Phil

Edited by deleted (Thu 15-Mar-18 12:58:30)