In reply to a post by therioman:

In reply to a post by Grimers:

I would say it's significant, if people think they already have "fibre" then they aren't going to order FTTP.

People are interested in experience more than naming outside of the geek and tech centric types - your average consumer couldn't give a toss what you call the service or how it is delivered, what they care about is whether it works and if the price is right for them. You can call it super-dooper-internet-ultrasuperfast-glassy-fibre-pro-premium but what they want to know is "will netflix work fine on it" and "how much is it".

If the current service works for the user and gives them what they want and the price is right for them, they have no incentive to get more. It really is as simple as that. I know people would love to pretend there is a case for FTTP everywhere and everyone wants gigabit, but that isn't true - it just isn't that binary a decision.

Completely agree, but would add to your list of ‘what they want to knows’ that the wifi coverage is unfaltering and covers every millimetre of their home.

I manage perfectly well with the ~43Mbps that I get but the best selling point for my money would be stability and reliability. Target people on a long line like me and that would be a winner.

Exactly! This is why I don't understand why OR are not focussing on long VDSL and ADSL-only lines, as in many cases, especially around here, they're deploying to/enabling areas that already have decent VDSL speeds, first. There are many places around here that desperately need FTTP but could be waiting months/years for it to arrive, whereas here where we already had a decent FTTC speed, have had FTTP for 3 months. I guess a lot of it comes down to cost and/or ease of deployment, but I'm sure OR would get a lot more return if they prioritised slower areas.

Edited by Grimers (Tue 21-Dec-21 13:45:30)

In reply to a post by therioman:

In reply to a post by threelegs:

Strangely I have just upgraded my bb service from BT 150/30service to their 500/75 service and it has cost me only an extra £3.40 a month. Do i need the extra speed? probably not but for that price why not?

Because that's £40.80 a year someone would be spending potentially for nothing, even ignoring that BT will stick in an annual increase on everyone so will be more than that as time goes by.

If someone is more than happy with 150/30 and it does what they need, paying any amount more for more speed they don't need doesn't represent good value to you, but it's a great deal to BT...

but my £3.40 a month increase is probably less than people spend to get a coffee in costalot/star bucks and they justify that to themselves perhaps every day ( i never buy coffee out at those places). so my increase is cheap and if i want to and can afford it that is my perogative

In reply to a post by Grimers:

There are many places around here that desperately need FTTP but could be waiting months/years for it to arrive, whereas here where we already had a decent FTTC speed, have had FTTP for 3 months. I guess a lot of it comes down to cost and/or ease of deployment, but I'm sure OR would get a lot more return if they prioritised slower areas.

The trouble is, there's very little return to Openreach for migrating people from FTTC to FTTP. They only receive an extra £1.70 per month at wholesale (that's for 40/10), plus a bit more from the small proportion of people who upgrade to Ultrafast. Any further benefit will only accrue way in the future, when they can shut down the copper network.

Therefore, they focus on the places where installation is cheapest. Then they can defer the big expenditure as long as possible, most likely with cap in hand to government.

Their second priority is areas covered by VM and altnets, since losing customers from FTTC costs them real money.

Yes FTTP is a (pretty big) jigsaw part of their long term transformation change to ‘All IP’ - the savings from which will be in the long term enormous as they allude in every quarterly results report….
- Openreach get out of voice provision entirely with the retirement of PSTN (WLR withdrawal) nationally at the end of 2025
- reduce their exchange estate to 1/5 of it current size over the next two decades
- in tandem retire the bulk of the FTTC / copper estate as FTTP becomes the predominant delivery technology for IP over the next decade

Right now their absolute focus is to accelerate the build FTTP as fast as possible, reduce the cost of build and grow the customer FTTP connections equally as fast as possible.

In reply to a post by Grimers:

Even though that's a slightly weird way to put it, you do have a point!

Came to mind as I was buying an EV at the time. Revelation for those EV zealots that totally missed the concept of an analogy.

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

Yes FTTP is a (pretty big) jigsaw part of their long term transformation change to ‘All IP’ - the savings from which will be in the long term enormous as they allude in every quarterly results report….
- Openreach get out of voice provision entirely with the retirement of PSTN (WLR withdrawal) nationally at the end of 2025
- reduce their exchange estate to 1/5 of it current size over the next two decades
- in tandem retire the bulk of the FTTC / copper estate as FTTP becomes the predominant delivery technology for IP over the next decade

Right now their absolute focus is to accelerate the build FTTP as fast as possible, reduce the cost of build and grow the customer FTTP connections equally as fast as possible.

Please explain how FTTC doesn't allow retiring of WLR, reduction of exchange estate and removal of the bulk of the exchange-side copper, with a reminder that recovery of copper appears to be unviable.

What’s with the Fin thing in your signature?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baHsoEAAMZU