Post deleted by Hyperoptic

In reply to a post by hopkapi:

In reply to a post by Hyperoptic:

Choosing FTTP from Hyperoptic does not mean residents have a choice of one provider. If they wish to subscribe to FTTC, they are able to.

Unless I'm missing something, that's exactly what it means in this case. Either they fund a FTTC/PCP build, or a Hyperoptic build. Residents won't get both.

That's not the case, let me clarify. If Hyperoptic installs into a building - it's a separate FTTP solution that is independent from any FTTC service available to them. Residents do have the choice of both.

I have edited my original posting so it's clearer - sorry for any confusion!

Sunita

In reply to a post by Hyperoptic:

In reply to a post by hopkapi:

In reply to a post by Hyperoptic:

Choosing FTTP from Hyperoptic does not mean residents have a choice of one provider. If they wish to subscribe to FTTC, they are able to.

Unless I'm missing something, that's exactly what it means in this case. Either they fund a FTTC/PCP build, or a Hyperoptic build. Residents won't get both.

That's not the case, let me clarify. If Hyperoptic installs into a building - it's a separate FTTP solution that is independent from any FTTC service available to them. Residents do have the choice of both.

I have edited my original posting so it's clearer - sorry for any confusion!

Sunita

And who will fund the separate FTTC installation? Hyperoptic?

I, and probably most others, understand that the costs of either solution are so that the only way to get a reasonable price is to choose one or the other.

Or are you saying you would install just one or two premises at £300 each?

Ok - if it's a case that residents wish to fund their own cabinet then bottom line is that it's still FTTC - the speeds will be "up to x" and inconsistent especially during peak times.

If they wish to have an full fibre installation from Hyperoptic then residents can choose to either subscribe to Hyperoptic and experience consistent speeds or any other services currently available to them and in the future.

We have a growing number of customers who have moved from FTTC services so it's worth considering which option is really future-proofing the building.

Sunita

Incidentally, residents can choose when they subscribe to Hyperoptic, once the infrastructure is installed, subscribers are activated when they're ready to switch over.

Installation into individual premises is usually free of charge to the resident when they subscribe to service. We do offer an installation without subscription - usually £40 during the early phase of installation to the site. Many landlords choose the latter option to increase the attractiveness of their properties to potential tenants.

Sunita

You are totally missing the point. Read the original post again.

The management company - owned and funded by te residents will have to find around £20k to get the infrastructure in place for whichever solution they choose. They cannot afford to go down two routes and if your service is installed then each resident will be required to provide funding of over £300.

I understand your point, I cannot discuss the specifics of this particular building however can say that the installation costs for the majority of buildings is £0 - subject to survey and interest from residents.

So if there's interest and the survey confirms there are no issues for installation, then I'm confident the figures quoted do not apply.

Sunita

In reply to a post by Hyperoptic:

... however can say that the installation costs for the majority of buildings is £0 - subject to survey and interest from residents.

...But if residents don't want to be tied to Hyperoptic, then it's £40 per tenant for the installation, as you've just said.

In reply to a post by ukhardy07:

EE already offer it in London however the usage caps are low. Later this year 3 are coming into the game and they have promised no price increases. This means 3 are likely to offer all you can eat 4g at a reasonable price

Unfortunately all the hyperbole about 4G being a great solution for those in fixed-line broadband not-spots or places overlooked by NGA is exactly that - hyperbole.

Thee traffic manage their connections - and they traffic manage them with a sledge hammer. If you use more than 15GB a month (or 500MB a day - they average it out) expect your speeds to drop to circa 1Mbit/sec.

I've had this first hand on both "The One Plan" and a Data plan - full signal of DC-HSDPA, which achieves around 22Mbit throughput until said amount of usage is reached and then voomph, speed drops, 22 fold.

And as already touted whilst EE have phenomenal speeds (we achieved 45Mbit actual throughput on the outskirts of Bristol with a full LTE signal), they also have no tariffs above 8GB usage per month, rendering the whole point of having NGA mobile broadband null and void.

Next best thing? ...

Edited by deleted (Sat 27-Jul-13 17:56:13)

In reply to a post by izools:

Next best thing? ...

Yes, dedicated broadband LTE networks - not a general usage network (as our current mobile networks are). This would basically use LTE technology to reduce cost of deployment and so they can purchase retail equipment - but essentially be for 'wireless broadband' use only.