jabuzzard

the greenfield will be funded by the SOD payment from the developer and would not have copper in and so you get a return on that , who is going to fund the outlay of the other X hundred houses and what type of return would you want , . there is a massive difference between FTTP in greenfield and FTTP in brownfield - (eserpcailly in a 1970s, 1980s estate irrelevant of the spine and aggregation node and the splitters . (so you funding the duct wortk , all the buried lead ins and every thing else associated with a brown field fttp development , - , its clear you think you rock up[ with a fibre cable and hey presto. every body gets service. - its n othing like that and anything that involves extensive cilvs work will massive increase the Gap required over the commercial case and wont be done

You think a developer of a 1980's housing development is making contributions to an FTTP rollout?

Do you even read threads?

the greenfield will be funded by the SOD payment from the developer

You do realise it's OpenReach who pay the developer a SOD payment and not the other way round?

You have completely missed the point.

Housing estate built late 1960's very to early 1970's has direct buried telephone to telegraph poles (at least I think that's the case from what I have seen after repairs to the cable in the past). Developer came back in early 1980's for a second phase which is almost certainly ducted. There are no telegraph poles visible for starters. The older bit of the estate mostly has very good speeds, with bits furthest from the entrance dipping to around 40Mbps. The newer bit of the estate has poor broadband speeds. Everything is fed from a cabinet at the entrance to the estate.

Recently a developer has started building two houses on some previously unused land between the old and new sections of the estate. My guess is the original developer considered the land the two new houses are being built on too steep. In fact I would still consider that to be the case.

Now as I understand it Openreach only does FTTP hooks for new properties, so the developer of the two new properties pays £X which looking at the price list is likely to be much lower than £Y the cost to Openreach of the install. These properties are not yet finished either so chances of the fibre being pulled to them is low. They don't have roofs yet.

There is now a CFP in play primarily targeting the newer end of the estate with the worst speeds, which starts beyond the two new houses.

Now Openreach can spend £Y and then £Z either via the CFP or at some point in the future if you work on the premise that something close to 100% fibre us the ultimate goal.

The point I was making is that doing both together at the same time would be significantly cheaper than £(Y+Z) and make the CFP more attractive. In fact my guess is the marginal cost increase to serve the new bit of the estate especially if it's ducted is quite low. However this does as I suggested require Openreach to think outside the box.

I am sort of curious how BT got extra lines to the new bit of the estate back in the day as I am not obvious signs of trenching up of roads/paths to lay extra cable and I have no recollection of any being done either, so it may be already ducted. Bizarrely a couple of years ago a whole bunch of Openreach manholes where inserted into the paths around the old bit of the estate and at the base of all the telegraph poles. Other interesting point of note is that a significant proportion of the cabinets of the exchange had g.Fast pods fitted but not the one for this estate.

For reference purposes it's NEPH cabinet 4.