Its one of those funny things, I am very jealous of people that can get FTTP but then the massive delay and possible issues compared to people getting FTTC makes me think I am glad I only have FTTC.

Your comment can be extended to FTTC.

Back in June 2015, BT reported that only 19% overall in FTTC enabled areas, had actually taken it up, bearing in mind that the report covers from when FTTC first started to be installed, so 2009 or there-about to probably about April 2015, with around 80% to 90% given as the coverage.


With "my" FTTC directly visible from my lounge window, about 10 Metres away, operational from March 2014, I upgraded in June 2014; connected to the PCP covering about 300 very local subscribers; but in May 2015, only 17% at MAXIMUM had actually upgraded, 48 out of a FTTC capacity of 288.

In May 2015, the second tranche of Filter/Links was installed in the FTTC, as I spoke to the technician doing it.

He had about 25 FTTCs to similarly increase the F/L capacity in that day.

There was a flurry of visits to the PCP, to do actual ordered upgrades, in the next four weeks; but since then the visits have dropped back to the level observed in the first year.

If it carries on at the same rate, it will take to about 2020 to fully use that FTTC with particularly the DSLAM, Power Supplies, Batteries etc working away at less than peak.

It is almost as though conventional commercial criteria for return on investment are being completely ignored.

And not to be confused with the 80% to 90% AVAILABILITY/COVERAGE figure, all too often quoted.

In this localised case, there is 100% Availability/Coverage in PCP/Subscriber; but only about 17% UPGRADES/TAKE-UP in May 2015.

---------------

Although not absolute confirmation, the TBB Broadband Map Speed Results do not contradict the situation described above, my own results being very clearly higher/faster than most in the surrounding area, even when I notionally take account of the several that have come and gone in the 15 months since I upgraded, ie tested 1 to 5 times immediately after upgrading; but not continued.

Now you've confused me. Are you saying that people have been unable to order FTTC services because the capacity hasn't been installed in the cabinet, or are you saying that people aren't ordering the service? If it's the former, then it's astonishingly bad if it's taken almost a year to install required capacity. If, however, it's the latter, people can't be forced to take the service. All that can be done is that it be marketed to them via direct sales calls (usually from their existing supplier) or more general advertising.

It may be that some people are happy enough with their existing speeds, or that they are locked into contracts. Sometimes LLU operators delay putting in the links to the GEA services so the full range of operators is not available.

The basis on which the BDUK bids were apparently made was on a 20% take-up, which does seem unambitious, and the gap funding was based on that (so around 60 premises in your area). Since then, BT have revised the target to 30% (so around 90 homes in your area) and this has accelerated what's called the "clawback" process by which excess subsidy is repaid so this can be reinvested.

You are right that the ROI on FTTC is highly sensitive to takeup rates as the initial capital investment is quite high whilst the marginal cost of enabling a line is low. Just what BT really expect in the way of takeup is maybe a bit higher than what has been publicly announced.

It's a rather different issue to the delays in delivering FTTP (where available) as that is labour intensive on a per-property basis.

One of the reasons that people seem to overlook with the FTTP vs FTTC debate is the massively higher resources that are required for the former. FTTC rolls out a lot faster as the most time consuming bit (running new fibre and local manifolds plus the links to each property) are not required. It means that most of the network can be upgraded much faster and (of course), revenue starts flowing in faster.

However, people shouldn't think that fibre penetration will necessarily stop at the FTTC cabinet. Now fibre is deeper into the network it can be pushed further, either using full FTTP or more local varieties of hybrid techologies using FttrN.

So yes, if the roll-out had been full FTTP you could be waiting for many more years short of the UK training a vast army of people. I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation and it looked like it would require an additional 100k people to do a national FTTP rollout in anything less than a decade.

The B4RN social media accounts are also a good indicator of the time taken to dig in the final drop to a property that does not existing ducting, 4 to 5 people for 3 to 4 hours seems common, and this is ignoring the long runs they have between premises due to the rural nature.

Premises on BT network with pre-existing duct work should be faster.

It's the second of your thoughts- that although the initial capacity available for ordering, was 48, it took a year for the orders to reach about that figure, leading to the second tranche of 48 Filter/Links being installed.

Judging by what I saw at the PCP, there were probably about 6 "delayed orders" and 4 "normal orders" connected in the 4 weeks following the second set.

It then settled to apparently around 2 to 4 a month; but now seems likely to have dropped a bit on that, as I have not seen any technicians at the PCP for about 4 weeks, keeping in mind that for an individual upgrade, the immediate outside work is at the PCP, as the FTTC will have been prepared on this batch basis.

----------------

And all the other evidence that I have seen, appears to support my observations.

For example, in about November 2014, BT gave a figure of 13% for such upgrades.

In June 2015, it had risen to 19%.

So my local PCP/FTTC combination at about 16% maximum in May 2015 after 14 months availability, sits neatly in between.

------------

Obviously, I don't know the full story; but from the technician having about 25 FTTC existing cabinets to fit batches of Filter/Links to that day, it seems likely to be the normal practice.

-----------

The right-side of "my" FTTC has a back-plane of sockets, capable superficially of taking 300 F/Ls; organised in two columns, each having groups of 25 F/L sockets, 5 rows by 5 columns; the fifth/bottom row being brown; and its last socket, the 25th in each of the groups is left empty, hence 288 instead of 300.

I have not found out why that 25th socket is left empty - possibly for testing relative to the DSLAM capacities.

So initially in March 2014, the first two groups in the left column, amounting to 48/50 sockets, was fitted with 48 F/Ls, followed by the next two groups below in the left column, May 2015.

---------

The Filter-Links are about about 1 cubic inch roughly, mainly white, with suitable pins projecting at the back, to enter the back-plane sockets.

Could be mistaken for fancy Fuses or small Circuit Breakers

---------

Agreed that in part, some may be locked-in to contracts and/or don't see any benefit from upgrading.

But with clearly more than a year having passed, I would expect that the first group would have started to upgrade, if they thought it of use to them.

For all of them, they might not know that FTTC is available.

There has been no specific advertising in this area; and the FTTC cabinet has nothing to identify it as such.

it is about 45 Metres from the PCP, across a road junction, so nothing really to directly associate it with the phone system or with broadband.

I did not really need the extra speed; but I upgraded simply to ensure I had an FTTC-routed connection; and it only cost £1 per month more.

------------

Every month I meet with about 15 to 20 colleagues, covering a wider area. We are all from the Electronics Industry, so have an ongoing interest.

Only one has positively upgraded. On Monday he was demonstrating his remote control of his central heating system, in the pub where we meet.

He also like myself, has upgraded to Windows 10, few of the others have done so; and one has reverted to Windows 7, after trying W10.

Another one has talked with me over the past year, about possibly upgrading to Broadband; but there are genuine technical problems for him, particularly distance.

A third one on Monday said that he had looked in to it; but had come to the conclusion that it was not worth-while for him.

The remainder on Monday were not interested, being satisfied with their present ADSLx facilities; or in one case, no Web access at all.


About 7 times a year, I meet with similar groups, mainly at the HQ of a major Aerospace/Electronics company; and they seem to be similarly minded.

One of those absolutely refuses to have Web access of any sort; and thus all minutes and other documentation has to be by Royal Mail.

In reply to a post by TheEulerID:

Now you've confused me. Are you saying that people have been unable to order FTTC services because the capacity hasn't been installed in the cabinet, or are you saying that people aren't ordering the service? If it's the former, then it's astonishingly bad if it's taken almost a year to install required capacity. If, however, it's the latter, people can't be forced to take the service. All that can be done is that it be marketed to them via direct sales calls (usually from their existing supplier) or more general advertising.

The former appears to be the case in my area (STANSTED cabinet 13) where I have now determined that some folk DO have FTTC (judging by the quoted speed tests), the cabinet appears therefore to be fully connected and running but I am unable to order due to 'high demand' which has been the case now for about 14 months. Estimates for when capacity will be restored have persistently been for later the current month or the following month. The latest update was on the 6th October 2015 when the date moved from the 7th October 2015 to the 4th November 2015.

I couldn't care less about FTTP, I just want something faster than the 1-2mbps which I get on ADSL.

Have you read my post Here