Yep, the whole market is a mess, rock bottom prices so ISP's are fighting over pennies.

People want faster speeds, no caps or throttling all for what they pay now, I don't believe the posts above stating people will pay more, not many people. If its a choice between bumbling on with what they have now or paying an extra 20-30 a month they'll put up with whatever service they have now.

I just hope when BT release FTTP as a proper product it costs and arm & few legs to set the bar.

sell a 0.5mbit service for £10 (not less), 8mbit should be no less than £20-25 and double digit speeds keep above the £30 mark. Isp's need to stop been scared of churn, if someone threatens to leave let them, remove retentions departments.

They will if the pricing is structured like this.

Many people don't realise what they get. They think they are on 24Meg for 12 quid, so why would they be tempted to pay more? Structuring the prices as Chrysalis suggests and making plain to people what the requirements are for acceptable performance on VOD and catch up services etc., would very likely make people think about paying that "middle rate".

I think even the usa had a defiition of broadband which would put our adsl to shame, but nothing much happened here, I think we still stuck at anything above isdn speeds is defined as broadband.

ITs a good idea but in practice it would be weakely implemented we would probably get 200kbit defined as broadband and 10mbit defined as superfast broadband.

I would be happy to define 512kbit as broadband but superfast should be something like 50mbit minimum and the typical speed (not up to) should be at least that much. superfast I would also have a high upload speed stated such as 10mbit+.

FTTP is going in York right now and more places than you think:-

BT's Current FTTP-Rollout Plan (Name Order)
ASHFORD, MIDDLESEX - Surrey - Jun 2011
BENTON - Tyne & Wear - Mar 2012
BIRMINGHAM CENTRAL - West Midlands - Mar 2012
BLACKFRIARS - Greater Manchester - Dec 2011
BOSCOMBE - Dorset - Sep 2011
BROUGHTON - Lancashire - Sep 2011
CALDICOT - Gwent - Dec 2011
CHAFFORD - Essex - Sep 2011
CHESTER SOUTH - Cheshire - Mar 2011
CULLINGWORTH - West Yorkshire - Sep 2011
DINNINGTON - South Yorkshire - Dec 2011
DUNDEE PARK - Tayside - Sep 2011
EDINBURGH FOUNTAINBRIDGE - Lothian - Dec 2011
EDINBURGH NEWINGTON - Lothian - Sep 2011
EDINBURGH WAVERLEY - Lothian - Dec 2011
ERITH - Greater London - Mar 2012
ETWALL - Derbyshire - Sep 2011
EWELL - Surrey - Sep 2011
EXETER - Devon - Jun 2011
FOLESHILL - West Midlands - Mar 2012
FOREST HILL - Greater London - Jun 2011
GLASGOW LANGSIDE - Strathclyde - Mar 2012
HAMILTON - Strathclyde - Mar 2012
HAMPTON - Hampshire - Dec 2011
HARDWICKE - Gloucestershire - Dec 2011
HEADLESS CROSS - Hereford & Worcester - Dec 2011
HILLSIDE, HEREFORD & WORCESTER - Hereford & Worcester - Sep 2011
HOLMES CHAPEL - Cheshire - Sep 2011
HOLMFIRTH - West Yorkshire - Sep 2011
HOOTON - Cheshire - Mar 2012
IRLAM - Greater Manchester - Sep 2011
IVYBRIDGE - Devon - Sep 2011
KIRBY MUXLOE - Leicestershire - Dec 2011
LEYTONSTONE - Greater London - Mar 2011
LIVERPOOL CENTRAL - Merseyside - Dec 2011
LONGTON, LANCASHIRE - Lancashire - Sep 2011
MALONE - Northern Ireland - [Date Not Set]
MALTBY - South Yorkshire - Mar 2012
MANCHESTER CENTRAL - Greater Manchester - Sep 2011
MAYFAIR - Greater London - Mar 2012
MIDCALDER - Lothian - Dec 2011
MOUNTWOOD - Merseyside - Dec 2011
NESTON - Cheshire - Mar 2012
NEWCASTLE CENTRAL - Tyne & Wear - Mar 2012
PENCOED - Mid Glamorgan - Dec 2011
PLYMOUTH - Devon - Sep 2011
PONTELAND - Northumberland - Mar 2012
PORTLAND - Dorset - Mar 2012
PRUDHOE - Northumberland - Dec 2011
RADLETT - Hertfordshire - Mar 2012
RINGWAY - Greater Manchester - Dec 2011
ROYAL - Merseyside - Sep 2011
SOUTHAMPTON - Hampshire - Sep 2011
STREETLY - West Midlands - Dec 2011
TAUNTON - Somerset - Dec 2011
THAMES DITTON - Surrey - Sep 2011
TRAFFORD - Greater Manchester - Mar 2012
WESTHOUGHTON - Greater Manchester - Mar 2012
WOODHAM FERRERS - Essex - Sep 2011
YORK - North Yorkshire - Mar 2011

In reply to a post by GMAN98:

I know exactly what DOCSIS is and the flavours it comes in, I'm saying in they could have done what they have done now a long time ago. The cabling was already in place.

Sorry this is extremely naive. In fact, Docsis 3 wasn't fully available until at least 2009.. and even then, the patchwork quilt of cable networks Virgin inherited from the likes of ntl, Cwc, et al needed to be harmonised. That stage came before docsis 3 rollout otherwise you'd end up with slighly different legacy kit in each region/franchise area. Surely that isn;t what you suggested they should have done? Also, for info, DPON is the tech that VM are rolling out in new builds. Current extentions to the network in areas very close to the network are continuing with HFC for now. When VM decide to mass migrate network to DPON, you can be sure it'll only happen when they exhaust docsis - which according to the latest white papers, suggest will be quite a while. In fact it even gives FTTP a run for its money for now.. with its top speeds.

In reply to a post by mrnelster:

sell a 0.5mbit service for £10 (not less), 8mbit should be no less than £20-25 and double digit speeds keep above the £30 mark. Isp's need to stop been scared of churn, if someone threatens to leave let them, remove retentions departments.

They will if the pricing is structured like this.

Many people don't realise what they get. They think they are on 24Meg for 12 quid, so why would they be tempted to pay more? Structuring the prices as Chrysalis suggests and making plain to people what the requirements are for acceptable performance on VOD and catch up services etc., would very likely make people think about paying that "middle rate".

The single biggest killer for me was the day burst speed became worthless, a all in one adsl max product that had no regards to speed completely killed the market. We had a majority of userbase been light users so had little demand for high usage products but was still demand for speed, problem was speed had no premium price point anymore (on cable but not adsl).

With the local loop ironically I think things got worse when openreach was formed. It added overheads to BT's bottom line and created artifical barriers for things like fault resolution. This is where I am still worried about proposed solutions, if the way forward is to keep a wholesale supplier but as a independent owner then many problems that exist now may still continue,. one reason I think VM are light years ahead is the fact they own their local loop so there is no middle man. The customer deals with the local loop owner direct. I guess the idea of a shared ownership between sky/VM/talk talk this may still be the case if the customer is of one of those 3 isp's but would ofcom butt in and tell them to create a openreach mark II?

I see 2 possible solutions to the mess. Both radically different to each other.

We either.

1 - scrap all the stuff that creates artifical retail competition, so isp's like aaisp etc. probably will die off as they effectively piggy back of BT, isp's like sky and talk talk who also piggy back I am not sure how they would go but I guess they would be forced to invest in some sort of local loop or have the capability to make a commercial arrangement with BT of their own back without ofcom, this would likely of course be at much higher cost than they pay now tho and cause a needed upward shift in retail prices.
2 - have a new local loop created or the current openreach one taken from BT and owned by either the state or an independent company or even the trio idea in this thread, basically not BT. having a local loop competition may work, but this idea doesnt fill me with much confidence as BT do have local loop competition already in various areas and it hasnt made BT up their game too much.

alternatively we could keep things how they are and all the isps agree to raise their prices alongside each other but then that would be cartel practice.

Over playing - yes a little, but because so many people dont play it all.

I do consider the point topic estimates when commenting on an area, and look at the providers involved too e.g. Orange is a hard one to judge as a lot of people appear to be on old IPStream fixed speed rather than Max.

Also if you listened to any of the radio/tv stuff if given time I do make it clear that it is not just rural areas with the issues.

No choice are we sure?

Market 1 has option of satellite, those on edges of towns should chase mobile firms for more masts and 3G coverage, and in at least one example in this thread, perhaps get VM to push the edges of their network in the town a bit further.

Hands up who has seen the state of US cable TV? Picture quality is so poor that I can imagine people jumping on FiOS and the cable providers who've gone for a digital setup.

Another issue in the US is the choice of retail provider which is very limited, and helps to flatten firms, which might actually reduce their costs.

How can you argue that people will pay when that is not proven either?
If people will pay for faster broadband, why is the takeup of 50Meg from VM so poor?

If ADSL is so dodgy as some assert, I do wonder why it ever sold, particularly in areas that have 3G/cable services.

The reality is this, £50 bought you 0.5Meg unlimited in 2000, and that £50 plus inflation pretty much can get you unlimited at faster speeds in the majority of the UK now, i.e. the footprint is vastly larger. Is that progress?

As for the current government doing anything, BDUK is running at a budget of £60 per household it helps, and Ed Vaizey is talking about getting the market to handle things, but the problem is the market does not want to do this final third, without sufficient money to sweeten the deal. Digital Pump anyone?