and openereach would not be allowed to have done the rest of the estate at the same time even if they had know it was there (gainshare is done of premises and postcode and speeds as that would have been using public money to enable unpublic subisidy premises to be finre enabled using public gainshare funding --

knowledge

building an FTTP network with public funds is probably harder and more complicated that building one without - even more complicated when you can only build to specific UPRNS then its gets even more complicated and mish mash

For another viewpoint on how OpenReach are harming us, the customers and actually assisting BT in retaining customers, look at section 3, Page 7 onwards here:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0026...

In reply to a post by TechGuyUK:

I'm Sorry but this is completely ignoring the simple facts...

EVEN IF OR has a contract to upgrade a couple of properties and do another 9 because the route to the same distribution point or underground chamber, it STILL makes FAR more sense to also do the other properties passed in the process as part of their national rollout at their own expense, because it is overall cheaper and faster than sending contractors back 2 , 3 or more times.

What you are suggesting is that it is not possible to allocate more than one cost centre to the work being done and that the paperwork is more costly than actual people on the ground, travel, scheduling and so on.

But hey - If OR can get PAID MORE to do it piecemeal and take longer, making more profit and dragging out the rollout for years longer than needed, then yes I understand they will most likely do that, UNLESS they are held accountable to provide the rollout as fast and economically as possible,

If they are NOT being held to this remit, then they are not offering the best value to us, the end users and tax payers - and are not fit for purpose.

I hear what you're saying, but Openreach don't have any obligation to provide the best value to end-users and tax payers. They only need to deliver what they are contracted to deliver, and in the case of public funded rollouts that is to provide whatever service the local authority agreed to the premises listed on the bid.

I blame Boris and Brexit!

In reply to a post by broadband66:

I blame Boris and Brexit!

You missed Covid and global warming.

I do totally get what your saying, and don’t totally disagree, however at some point the government have to set a limit, where the public fund, with private industry funding the rest. Also, as far as I’m aware for a lot, if not all council work there is a process which allows other altnets the opportunity to quote to provide the service and if they provided a better value offering they would receive the funding. By using OR the tax payers bill is probably reduce, as the amount of civils is likely to be significantly reduced.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

I blame Boris and Brexit!

Out means out and fibre cables get damaged if left outside so, no go

In reply to a post by TechGuyUK:

My view is that OpenReach are supposed to be running out Fibre broadly to the whole country

That might be your view but a more accurate view is that Openreach are doing what Openreach wants to do according to Openreach's plan.

logically should do it in the most efficient manner and use of resources and manpower

Which they probably are. Something about your property means it would take more resources or manpower than they can currently spare.

If we expect this road and area to be upgraded in the next 4 years, along with most of the country, then is makes sense to do a logical area like a whole postcode and tick it off as completed...

Why do you expect to be upgraded in the next four years? Has Openreach put that in writing?

It sucks, I'm sure, but you're taking this too personally. Openreach have done what they currently can in your area. They probably regret being unable to reach your property almost as much as you do. Unfortunately stuff happens and they have a timetable to keep. The resources needed to cable your particular property might be able to cable half a dozen other properties elsewhere.

Edited by Andrue (Sat 13-Nov-21 17:46:39)

Hi,

As per the first post, it is 11 out of 33 properties in a short cul-de-sac, all built at the same time that have been upgraded - leaving 22 NOT upgraded.

It is not just "my" property and I am not taking it at all personally, it is just a clearly inefficient way to manage a country wide rollout, to do it in tiny sections, revisiting each street many times.