In reply to a post by Anonymous:

coton park was slightly different as it was reassesed due to proposed eventual new build increasing the commerciallity of cab and therefore met commercial criterai based on that information and was deployed

That's interesting as Openreach claimed in their conversations with us that they don't consider potential new build.

I suspect having Vtesse present was more of a criteria - where did you hear discussion of potential new build as being a part of the criteria? If it's anything like the approach they've been taking in these estates they throw up new PCPs constantly rather than using old ones so new build is potentially not an issue.

In reply to a post by cammyuk81:

Thankfully our Mp and councillors for the area have been rather vocal in telling BT how next to useless they are at the moment.

I hope that isn't the case as OR is now digging their heels in where officals are being obstructive (such as Kensigton adn Chelsea) and being a lot more coperative where councils want to work with them (such as Cromer).

You need to fins someone who can help fight your corner I.e. the demand needed and what it will bring to the area that should help considerably

In reply to a post by cammyuk81:

As horrible as it sounds i know that Bt should not invest in an uneconomical cabinet thats why we want to start generating demand and getting money off people its just they won't give us the figures with this back and forth between the two groups!

Techguy thats brilliant I'll pass this onto our MP and round the list once I've read into it more a bit later tonight.

As a reference you can read what we are struggling with here!

http://www.fibreformiddleton.org.uk/

please click on my current speed test, Im in an area that is to be done but my cab has missed 3 install dates so far.

im not being funny we are a group of 16,000, only a small % will take fibre

Edited by deleted (Tue 21-Aug-12 00:57:10)

In reply to a post by New_Londoner:

The BDUK money is meant to fund areas that are otherwise "uneconomic". Assuming you're referring to the three cabinets not on Openreach's list (?), these seem to fit squarely into the BDUK category so should be included in the county council's broadband plan.

So I suggest you push the county on this, get your MP to do so too. If they wont include the area then get them to explain why not, after all they work for you, not the other way round.

The BDUK money is meant to fund mostly rural cabinets that are not able to become economic regardless of how much demand is generated, not urban cabinets that can become economic once a certain threshold of committed uptake is reached.

Urban cabinets are supposed to become viable through a combination of increased uptake and incremental cost reduction through upgrade of surrounding cabinets and fibre network though there will, of course, be some exceptions.

Those aren't my words, they're the words of a senior BDUK representative.

As far as pushing the county goes I am. I'm pushing them to demand that Openreach re-do their viability checks based on genuine commercial considerations rather than on the assumption that the tax payer will plug the gaps in their urban coverage.

BDUK and other state aid is supposed to be present in cases of genuine market failure, not to offer an incentive for the market to intentionally fail as it knows it can get the tax payer to fund its CapEx.

What private company would turn down an open chequebook, especially when the bill the present at the end has zero granularity and they don't have to present their cost base?

Edited by deleted (Sun 18-Nov-12 12:23:31)

Those may be words of a senior BDUK representative but are wrong

The project target is to go from 66% coverage to 90% coverage, the final 10% getting 2 Mbps or superfast via the smaller RCBF projects.

Now if you look at how much of the UK is rural, you find that only 13% to 20% (Depending on your definition) is rural, so clearly a good number of cabinets that are in non-rural areas are going to be enabled via the scheme.

Not saying it is the right way, just pointing out that is what is happening. We have had ministers talking of USO before, so words from people in projects is not always correct.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Those may be words of a senior BDUK representative but are wrong

The project target is to go from 66% coverage to 90% coverage, the final 10% getting 2 Mbps or superfast via the smaller RCBF projects.

Now if you look at how much of the UK is rural, you find that only 13% to 20% (Depending on your definition) is rural, so clearly a good number of cabinets that are in non-rural areas are going to be enabled via the scheme.

Not saying it is the right way, just pointing out that is what is happening. We have had ministers talking of USO before, so words from people in projects is not always correct.

Andrew, are you saying that the BDUK programme violates state aid rules?

Since when did state aid rules you to target only rural areas? (Birmingham got very fast approval for its in middle of city fibre deployment)

The market has said commercial projects will stop at 66% so the other 34% are market failure, BDUK is aiming at covering 24% of this, some councils are planning to exceed this.

Each local authority has to identify the areas in their area where the market will and wont go. Hence the open market reviews and then consultation

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Since when did state aid rules you to target only rural areas? (Birmingham got very fast approval for its in middle of city fibre deployment)

The market has said commercial projects will stop at 66% so the other 34% are market failure, BDUK is aiming at covering 24% of this, some councils are planning to exceed this.

Each local authority has to identify the areas in their area where the market will and wont go. Hence the open market reviews and then consultation

I didn't say anything about upgrading rural cabinets.

Are Openreach aware they're stopping at the initial phase and 66%?

You must understand that this decision was not taken lightly, however, we have made a commitment to our customers, shareholders and the government to roll-out fibre broadband to 66% of the UK by November 2014. This is a complex and long term project with finite timescales and funding, we have to work within this confinement which ultimately means some areas are deferred. However, we do intend to revisit areas not included in the initial rollout, such as SD/HYWRD, for possible deployment at a later date.
Regards
Tony Franklin
Network Investment Customer Engagement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=LLngsilF0MaD8AdiYb...

Seems not.

You are aware of the 'balancing' tests for state aid that are considered, right?

� Is there a market failure that needs to be corrected?
� Is state aid the appropriate instrument to remedy the problem?
� Does it induce a change of behaviour in the aid recipient?
� Is it proportionate?

It's not really surprising looking at those that the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport had to go to Brussels to try and bend ears to get the state aid approved.

As far as local authorities identifying where the market will and won't go given BT refuse to provide accurate, granular costings either before or after procurement or their methodology for viability it's largely dependent on their largely unverifiable say-so leaving huge vulnerability to a change in behaviour by the recipient to ensure increased levels of aid and/or profit from such aid.

It's no wonder this project is struggling to get state aid approval.

The joy of trying to fasttrack a scheme that is assuming market failure when if the market were left to its own devices this may all be covered in ten years time. In fact I reckon if Openreach were left to its own devices then by 2017-2018 then would be near to 90% coverage anyway.

EU has the same problems arising for many broadband projects underway and not just in the UK. The broadband market and the fibre one in particular is so new, and costs are coming down every few weeks for kit and hardware, refining deployment methods reducing labour costs. That a project that is non-commercial now may very will be in three years

As for you not talking about rural correct, it was someone elses quote, but I like to remind people that the BDUK project is not just rural.

Seems openreach know all about the stopping at a certain line "finite timescales and funding" so those missed now, might still be on their to-do list to do eventually with their own money.