OFCOM Connected nations report Oct 2018

OFCOM have just released their latest connected nationsreport based on May 2018 data.

It shows the steady growth in Full Fibre availability with Two areas of the country over 50% full fibre and a couple of others rapidly approaching that marker.

As expected Hull is top at 69% with a surprising 2nd in Southwark at 53% and Ards and North Down 3rd at 48%.another 7 areas are over 25%.

Lots of other detail in the dataset including USO premises, Lowest being Blackpool at only 22 ( only 3 under 10Mb dL) highest unsurprisingly Highlands at 19336.

One very minimal data I do have to question how reliable is the data being used for this report.

For example, I know the two postcodes SW9 6UN and SW9 6UW rather well having negotiated and arranged gap funding to pay for an AIO cab to be installed to serve our former EO lines. SW9 6UN has six properties (6 flats in a single block) and SW9 6UW has sixty nine properties, 33 flats and 36 houses. None have access to VM despite the VM cable running in the pavement alongside some of these properties.

The OFCOM report states:
SW9 6UN. 100% full fibre. This is incorrect, 100% VDSL2+ served by WRVAUX 54

SW9 6UW. 52.2% Superfast and 47.8% Ultrafast with 47.8% full fibre. Again this is incorrect. All properties in the development are "superfast" with no full fibre with all properties being served by the AIO cab WRVAUX 54.

How many such other errors does the report contain?

MCM

I haven't yet looked at the postcode data but always have doubts about the data accuracy.

It is meant to be produced from CP provided data and I wonder which provider is using proposed coverage rather than actual or is using premises passed in the street rather than served. Cityfibre press reports sometime use the latter but I wouldn't count them as Full fibre until the local infrastructure is active and able to order not demand aggregation to build..

Without seeing the provider data I could make the value judgement on which operator may be inflating the figure, but it seems someone is. You may have some idea from your local area!

The only CP that might be providing false data would be VM as their cable is in the pavement and just 2m or so from all six SW9 6UN properties and fifteen of the SW9 6UW properties but then VM isn't full fibre. Other than for this I don't have a clue as to the possible source of figures which are clearly incorrect. Note also that VM have in the past and continue today refuse to supply any of the properties they pass at these two post codes.

We negotiated with both Hyperoptic and BT Openreach when we were seeking to improve our slow EO lines however if the source were Hyperoptic I would have expected them to show 100% for both postcodes.

I've just noticed that the claim of 47.8% full fibre for SW9 6UW would equate to 33 properties which just happens to be the number of flats. The figures therefore seeming to claim that all of the flats at both SW9 6UN and SW9 6UW had access to full fibre but none of the houses. So perhaps Hyperoptic is the source although their proposal did include serving the houses via Ethernet.

Hyperoptic do have multiple sets of postcodes for availability and one of these does include ones they are tracking demand for and/or in the stage of building.

I know the rough size of both so when the affiliate channel sends out the list I can quickly tell if it is the correct set or not.

This would explain things, I suggest someone other than me contacts Ofcom to ask they check and get corrections out there if this is wrong before it ends up in the House of Commons Library

Andrew,
Do you by any chance have a suitable e-mail address for me to use? The OFCOM site provides little to help although I guess I could try [email protected] which may or may not end up with those who produced the report.

MCM

The 'about this data' PDFs suggest [email protected] is the contact to go to.

I would be interested in any reply you get.

Maybe they include availability of FOD in their FTTP/ultrafast figures?

Don't believe they do, otherwise the FTTP figure would be massively higher

For my postcode 73.3% are below the USO with 26.7% on full fibre.

Thank you. I missed that.

MM

Interesting, however, the question has to be, are those figures/percentages correct?

In reply to a post by witchunt:

Maybe they include availability of FOD in their FTTP/ultrafast figures?

They don't otherwise my postcode would be at 100% instead of 26.7%

This data is just wrong - W1U 1BT only has ADSL - cabinet P40 is not FTTC enabled but data shows 100% SFBB?

https://www.telecom-tariffs.co.uk/codelook.htm?xid=1...

I notice they are including Relish as a data source - does this mean they claim all of central London has super fast broadband because you can use a 4G modem - I tried Relish last year and you don't get superfast speeds.

Edited by brookheather (Tue 02-Oct-18 21:23:38)

Cabinet is split across EO and cabinet 40

Suspect they are counting the Relish, as it has coverage but we don't tick superfast for the London deployment due to lack of external aerial

I have now written to OFCOM.

I also took the liberty of including brookheather's data regarding W1U 1BT and the possibility that Relish are claiming an ability to deliver speeds in some areas in excess of those attainable by potential users.

If I get a reply other than a simple acknowledgement I'll post details here.

NornIron91

Could you share the postcode?

And do the figure align with your local knowledge?

It's quite clear that OFCOM have no interest in feedback. I wrote on the 2nd October and OFCOM haven't had the courtesy to respond. Not that, in truth, I expected any different from this self-serving quango.

Update.

OFCOM have today 25 Oct replied to my post to them of 2 Oct.

"Good afternoon x,

Thank you for raising your points as your observations are valuable for us to be able to follow up on the data that has been made available to us.

I will forward to our team for further investigation.

Yours sincerely,"

I notice on the Relish product details page they now only claim "Average speed 20Mbps" so don't believe this qualifies as super fast?

The London network should not tick superfast in my view

I included your comments regarding Relish in W1 in my e-mail to OFCOM.