Exchange not to be upgraded

The current BT adverts for their new Infinity broadband make me furious. The reason is that exchanges such as mine have not even been upgraded to allow for speeds of up to 20MBp/s & BT have told me they have no plans to do so anytime soon. It may be a rural area but I'd still like to be able to download a movie in high definition without it taking all day. There are also homes where more than one device uses the internet connection and of course some people do work from home but BT doesn't take notice of any of this. We were one of the last to have broadband switched on, are we going to be waiting until 2015 before the speed increases? Cable is unfortunately not available here, is there any way to get BT to upgrade our exchange?
Yours,
Frustrated at BT

One way was to win the Race To Infinity http://www.racetoinfinity.bt.com/winners

The race to Infinity was a non-starter. I rushe to the website only to be told we didn't have enough homes for to even enter the race. Thank you BT!
Frustrated at BT

Oh! It was a three-legged race?

Do you have enough homes to do it as a community project?

why should bt or any other company provide service where they would be out of pocket.

Business will only invest where they can make money. They will also invest in the areas that offer the best return on their money.

When I live in the city get a solid 16 meg connection , when I am down in cornwall only get 1/2 to 1 meg and it suffers from jitters.

I don't like under any delusions that BT or anyone should spend money so the house can get fast internet it just not financially viable

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

It may be a rural area but I'd still like to be able to download a movie in high definition without it taking all day. There are also homes where more than one device uses the internet connection and of course some people do work from home but BT doesn't take notice of any of this.

BT are a business. Why should they install and operate something at a loss just because it would make your life better? Or - why should I have to pay extra for my service in order cover the cost to BT of upgrading your service?

Anyway BT isn't the only telecoms provider in the country. BT have at least provided you with broadband. From the sound of it no other telecoms company has bothered to do that. Admittedly they surely had their own reasons for doing it(*) but still it seems a tad ungrateful to attack the only company that has been able to do anything for you.

(*)Probably to protect the value of their local loop when mobile phones took off.

Give BT lots of money or any of the other providers that can do ADSL2+ via LLU

Why should they install and operate something at a loss just because it would make your life better? Or - why should I have to pay extra for my service in order cover the cost to BT of upgrading your service?

Typical city-dweller entitlement attitude. Why would you have to pay "extra" to cover the cost of BT reaching the final third and at least giving small-town exchanges WBC? OFCOM would have kittens if BT announced they were raising rental charges to subsidise broadband roll-out elsewhere in the country. Don't talk [censored].

My exchange has 9k lines and we still only get ADSL Max.

I think you got it the wrong way round. It's the non-urban customers, with sub-par services and options, that are subsidising the FTTC connections of the townies by having to pay the same line rental charges as everyone else. We should be entitled to similar services, or we should be getting our phone service discounted. We're the ones paying "extra" so you can have your shiny cabinet sitting on your street.

BT made over a billion pounds in profit last year. No-one wants to hear their viability excuses. They are clearly doing very well for themselves.

What speed are you getting now? Since anyone with under 5Meg sync is not going to benefit much if at all from the upgrade to ADSL2+

If an exchange has a large proportion of lines in this category it may explain why it is further down the list.

You say your exchange was only enabled for ADSL pretty late, in which case likely to be the same for ADSL2+.

With 9000 lines then talk to TalkTalk they are unbundling some exchanges with only 2500 lines in them and offering ADSL2+. There is no need to rely on BT

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

... are we going to be waiting until 2015 before the speed increases?

I don't believe 2015 will guarantee you anything

2015 is when the current FTTC roll out is scheduled to end (I believe) but many exchanges may 'never' see fibre the way things are. I guess when the time comes for them to 'weigh in' the copper as it's worth so much they might replace it with fibre

I was watching a BT Infinity ad on TV last night and thought how stupid things were.
It doesn't seem very targeted advertising as a lot of people interested won't be able to get it...

We got ADSL in 2002/2003. I remember meeting you at the BT tower event in London, I was a campaign organiser

I'll get about 18mbit with my line. I currently max out at 8 with no problems and my margins are very good for a 1km line. Calculators says 18mbit, but I'd be happy with anything 12+.

TalkTalk put their kit in just before Xmas, (only LLU we have so far) but they are pants as an ISP and I never considered them. I only recently seen that some ISP's re-sell the backbone Opal service. I'm currently having a chat with Vivaciti about moving over to them.

It's just a damn shame you have to go LLU, or partial-LLU to get a decent service 8 years after my exchange went live. I was just moaning in another thread yesterday about an exchange a few miles from me (Hawarden) getting WBC and Fibre this year, with less lines than my own. They already have about 7 LLU operators there. My mind boggles at how it all works sometimes.

I kind of sympathise with the OP because I am in a similar situation -

I am on the Dumfries (Scotland). WSDMS.

It's the biggest town in the region!

LLU ADSL 2+ - yes

BT WBC - NOPE

Make sense? - NOPE

FTTC/FTTH - NOPE

I guess I am confused as to why BT WBC or FTTC just seems to have missed us out but LLU providers seem happy enough to install their service.

As the biggest town in an entire region I'm not sure there is an argument that says it's not viable?

In reply to a post by Koppo:

We got ADSL in 2002/2003. I remember meeting you at the BT tower event in London, I was a campaign organiser

TalkTalk put their kit in just before Xmas, (only LLU we have so far) but they are pants as an ISP and I never considered them.

I was in much the same position as you, getting ADSL in 2002 on my rural exchange. (Just over 4000 users). On an up to 8meg service (TT) I was getting circa 4.5meg with major contention in the evenings and at weekends.

Three years ago TT put in LLU, and I was migrated to their up to 20meg service. Since then I've had a stable 17meg connection with no outages. Speeds are consistent 24/7.

If you have problems their Call Centre may well be 'pants' but the LLU service, as delivered, is extremely good value. Any minor niggles I've had have been rapidly addressed on the TT user forum.

Cable and fibre are never likely to come here so this is as good as it gets at present. I'm not a gamer, download circa 70gig a month, mainly software/program updates, web browsing and watching HD films.

In reply to a post by Koppo:

I think you got it the wrong way round. It's the non-urban customers, with sub-par services and options, that are subsidising the FTTC connections of the townies by having to pay the same line rental charges as everyone else.

You're overlooking the fact that it's more expensive to provide you with the service in the first place and that there's more of 'me' to share the burden than there is of 'you'. To explain the latter comment:

Running costs may be similar for both of us since distance probably doesn't make much difference. However upgrading the service does cost money. In my case that cost is potentially shared across around five thousand telephone lines. We're also a fairly affluent town in the South East. Yes there's more cabinets in my town but the number of potential subscribers they bring into reach outweighs the additional cost of supporting more lines.

Put simply:It's the economics of supplying services to large urban areas v. small rural areas. There's nothing new or shocking here. No great conspiracy to exclude you from society. It's just the way the world works. That's why human beings invented urbanisation in the first place.

You are getting the best service that can be provided for your area for the same price as I pay. The thread starter is most likely getting better value for money than me. It's possible that their exchange is being run at a loss. Since I'm on a Market 3 exchange most likely I'm paying more for my service and the extra is being used to offset the OP's costs.

Now I can accept that - I'm a believer in the power of society and the better off helping the less well off. However I draw the line at providing people with luxuries and as far as I'm concerned speeds in excess of 4Mb/s are luxuries. I'm not really convinced that anyone with ADSL of any speed is seriously inconvenienced at the moment.

The same will be true in your particular case. None of these companies are being 'mean' and just ignoring rural areas. They'd all love to sign up more customers no matter where live, what colour their skin or anything else. The reason you don't get a particular service is because they can't make money on it.

Edited by Andrue (Fri 11-Mar-11 10:42:40)

In reply to a post by Aurhinius:

I guess I am confused as to why BT WBC or FTTC just seems to have missed us out but LLU providers seem happy enough to install their service.

As the biggest town in an entire region I'm not sure there is an argument that says it's not viable?

Now this intrigues me. I'm sure there's still some reason but it may be technical more than financial. Llandudno is another weird case. One of the biggest and most important towns on the North Wales coast yet it only got LLU last February and was full within a month. Interestingly that was about the same time that WBC went live there.

Here's the odd bit: To me that makes sense. BT upgraded their backhaul so finally TT could rent capacity off them. Either that or the two of them shared the cost of laying more cable.

But here's the rub:My exchange has been M3 for several years. We have pretty much every LLUO there is. Yet we only get WBC this month. We are also supposedly getting FTTC in December. So yeah - the decisions can weird but presumbably someone somewhere understands it

We got ADSL max in 2006.

I am guessing we are going to be on a roll out somewhere but no dates have been issued for WBC or FTTC.

I am slightly concerned because FTTC seems to have taken over WBC.

So we are starting to see those who were at the end of WBC not getting it because BT thought it would be better just to upgrade exchanges to FTTC (I agree but not at the cost of those still left to get WBC).

Problem is that it all seems to have pushed us back another 5 years (guess) in development.

Granted we are a rural region but as the biggest town you'd expect us to get something.

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

... exchanges such as mine have not even been upgraded to allow for speeds of up to 20MBp/s & BT have told me they have no plans to do so anytime soon. It may be a rural area but I'd still like to be able to download a movie in high definition without it taking all day.

As in MrSaffron's reply to koppo, what connection speed and download speed do you get now?

If you aren't getting enough to download an HD movie in a sensible time then it is highly unlikely WBC/ADSL2+ would improve things anyway, as it would suggest you have a long line.

WBC/ADSL2+ does not increase everyone's speeds. Even at 6Mbps connection on ADSL Max it can make little if any difference.

Perhaps you are merely with an ISP that doesn't provide 24/7 decent speeds on ADSL Max?

Same here.

Town Centre exchange, 5,000 lines, no LLU, no 21cn, no infinity and no cable as we live in a new build.

Stuck on rubbish 4 meg.

As per my reply to the OP, 21CN won't help. LLU might - not a higher connection speed, but an escape from the BT IP Profiling and noise mis-management system.

And may be you will as FTTC is rolled out to the 66%.

What bit of TalkTalk is pants? Visited someone who has a line that is running with them and seen how it performs?

Yes sales are over zealous, yes those who were with an old Tiscali account are seeing issues, as billing systems integrate, but the few TT lines I have access to run as close to Zen qos.

Maybe really pins it down but I appreciate your point.

Still maybe 5 years down the line when I maybe was due WBC next year isn't really re-assuring but knowing it for sure would make me feel a little better.

Andrue: Llandudno is not 21cn afaik, where did you hear that? It's Market 2 atm, with C&W also putting kit in there before Summer. There's a WBC desert stretching along the North Wales coastline after Rhyl and BT have shown no interest.

A letter from my MP to Ann Beynon was responded to with garbage.

As already stated, I get the full 8mb on my 1km line and my 25Db downstream attenuation and 4.5 SNR gives me a guess-timate of about 18mb. ADSL2 will be far better for me. I'm currently with IDNet at, who are a superb ISP and their Max Premium product is outstanding. The rub is that it's expensive at £35 per month for 40gb peak/160Gb off-peak bandwidth and I only use about 80Gb total. I can get 100gb off Vivaciti at double the speed and nearly half the cost. No-brainer really.

As for TalkTalk, I've read nothing but horror stories over the years and they seem to consistently cakewalk worst ISP awards every year. It may be true that the service itself isn't so bad - if you're lucky enough that it works okay - it seems to be when you have trouble with it that the problems begin. Useless tech support and ignorant call centres.

I'd rather use an Opal reseller. Shame Xilo is a bit slow out of the gate with their checker.

As for townies v "rural", the argument could go on all day. I guess it's the nature of the beast when the deregulated monopoly incumbent telco just puts profits first and cherry-picks where they're going to spend their money. Rip-off Britain is chock full of postcode lotteries, until the Government makes investment inroads to start catching up with our foreign brethren, why should broadband availability be any different?

Edited by deleted (Fri 11-Mar-11 14:21:37)

To be honest I am not sure whether other countries have conquered the rural/urban divide.
It is easy to see the best in other countries, but ignore the realities for those outside the areas with lots of PR.

To people looking at the UK from outside, we have 50% of homes with the option of 50Meg services now.

The situation was simpler in 2002/2003 since only BT Wholesale and NTL/Telewest were playing, but now there are more players and choice, and BT is not the monopoly it once was.

Talktalk have missed our exchange out for a reason.

All the other exchanges have got it.

The problem is, at least from our perspective, is that we have differing opinions to BT as to the definition of rural.

When you have a town so big that it takes 3 seperate exchanges to serve its 20k+ lines and we are still languishing in antiquated ADSL Max hell, it's easy to get narked when you see places 20 minutes away on the A55 getting FTTC, despite the fact that its in the ass-end of nowhere and has less lines than your own exchange.

The North/South Wales divide is particularly irksome. Most of the infrastructure investment takes place around Cardiff and Swansea. Loads of little exchanges around Cardiff, far smaller than ours, are state of the art. North Wales gets next to nothing. Unless you are Hawarden, or one of the chav-centrals (Rhyl, Wrexham).

It would be nice to have some transparency from BT, so at least you can understand the logic behind it all. What's the problem with the North Wales coast? Exchanges physically too small? Backhaul upgrade costs too high? Distance to nearest PoP? Lack of actual active broadband take-up in the areas?

Bah

yes at least knowing what goes in to making the decision and perhaps why some places are denied the technology would help.

Basically we are asking why.

Might get somewhere with a freedom of information request on that front.

In reply to a post by Aurhinius:

Might get somewhere with a freedom of information request on that front.

You'll get nowhere at all - FOI doesn't apply to commercial companies.

FWIW, given the lacklustre response to recentimproved bandwidth being provided in Wales, its even less likely that they will install anywhere except a dead cert.

My theory is that some areas will miss out on possible company investment as firms will see that they might get 20-30% of the money from sources like councils and BDUK and Welsh Assembly.

Cornwall bit the bullet and went all out, Wales while talking a lot has not committed to something yet.

In reply to a post by Koppo:

Andrue: Llandudno is not 21cn afaik, where did you hear that? It's Market 2 atm, with C&W also putting kit in there before Summer. There's a WBC desert stretching along the North Wales coastline after Rhyl and BT have shown no interest.

Yeah you're right. Guess BT must've cancelled it. Back when my Dad was tussling with TT it was claimed on Samknows to be imminent. Interesting to see that some other LLUOs are entering the market there at last.

Edited by Andrue (Fri 11-Mar-11 21:05:24)

Cable is unfortunately not available here,

Do the adverts for Virgin Cable Media make you furious also ? Why should 'BT' be obliged to upgrade your exchange ?

is there any way to get BT to upgrade our exchange?

Yes, pay them lots of money.

I see you live in London Zarjaz?

No veiled gloating in your contribution then eh?

that was before tax and before the paid of some of their debt

also why should a company be force to invest their money in area where they will not make the money back.

using the logic why don't we force you to sell your house to fund high speed internet.

BT as well as all other communications companies are there to make money not run as a charity.

Also as alot of people in towns are on LLU any money you pay to BT would not help us.

Longer the lines and less dense the area is as general rule the money it will cost to provide, maintain and upgrade.

I live both in the city and in a rural area with only 5 k lines over a huge area, i don't have any false idea the BT or anyone else should waste money providing fast internet. If users want/need it they should pay enough money to make it least slightly profitable

What's London got to do with it?

why should a company be force to invest their money in area where they will not make the money back.

Who'd be able to force them? Careful in your choice of phrasing. What you should have said is, "Why should a company choose to invest their money....etc".

Let's run with that. By your logic, why have BT chosen to upgrade an exchange 20 minutes away from me to 21cn this month AND install FTTC in Sept this year, when that exchange serves less residential and business lines than the one I am connected to?

I'll tell you why and it's a common theme if you look at the 21cn and fibre roll-outs: That exchange was Market 3, or better already. It seems BT are less concerned with feasibility and costs versus profit and more concerned about trying to tout business away from LLU operators and Virgin (in those areas served by it). A marketing strategy that has so far catastrophically failed in South Wales and a source of much merriment for me.

As for the guy above, making snide remarks along the lines of

Do the adverts for Virgin Cable Media make you furious also ? Why should 'BT' be obliged to upgrade your exchange ?

when that poster lives in London, i.e. "I can get absolutely any broadband service I want by whatever means I want - screw you Jack, I'm alright". That's the relevance. Shouldn't have needed an explanation really.

You feel that they should install something to provide you with better internet even if it does not make sense with business development or finance wise.

They will look at competitors, predicted uptake sometimes have competitors might hinder you getting upgraded othertimes it might help. the choice is BT its their money

Business will always invest money where they will get the best return for their money, be that keeping a customer base, get new customer or offering new product that will make them more money (or any combination of those reasons)

So what you are wanting is OFCOM or the government to force BT to upgrade the network that provides you.

There no other way than to either wait until it make business sense (which could be a while or require funding from resident or other parties) or force them to upgrade at their cost.

There could be many reasons that has made Openreach deem you exhange as not worth upgrading for anything, lack of easy access to back haul, no room at or around the exchange, planning restrictions and many others.


To give you an idea, let say I give you £100,000 to invest in one of the two options

Option a) exchange where you will make the money back within 5 years and after than make £10000 profit a year

Option b) exchange where you will make your money back after 10 years and after than make £1000 profit per year.

Which option would you or anyone else choose. The one which gives you the best return on your money.

busienss with shareholder must always do what is best for the company, even if the CEO wanted to give everyone free broadband for a year he could not do it as the shareholder have legal protection. Therefore they have to invest their money where they will get the best return for the business.

The only way to override business sense would be to force them, hence why i said and still maintain you want someone to force BT openreach to upgrade their network in your area.

People should not have voted conservative in the past and elect a government that privatised everything they could.

If BT was still owed (or even another company) by the government I would then agree with you they have a duty of care to ensure every has decent access within reason. But alas BT is private so can do what they want when it comes to investing their money.

After all if its a easily viable project to upgrade the network in your area then you could club together and do it yourself, other places have.

Edited by deleted (Sat 12-Mar-11 16:02:14)

In reply to a post by Cobra001:

If BT was still owed (or even another company) by the government I would then agree with you they have a duty of care to ensure every has decent access within reason. But alas BT is private so can do what they want when it comes to investing their money.

Because of course all government owned organisations are well run and the epitome of good business. They are known for investing in the latest technology and always provide the highest service levels. They have the advantage of benefiting directly from the expertise of senior politicians whose track record in guiding our great nation speaks for itself.

Er...

More likely if we BT was still government owned we wouldn't even have ADSL and we'd be paying far more for our bills. It amazes me how many people still think that nationalisation is a good idea.

I did not say that it would be any better under government control, all I said was that if it was still under government control then access for all would be an onjective which they would have to consider, under the current system access for all is not even considered when it comes to upgrading an the area network.

though i do think if bt open reach had been something like network rail we would be in a better position.


The problem is not that its private or public if that was the case, the problem is we are all wanting fast internet without paying for it. If I remember correctly we the 2nd cheapest country in the developed world. Yet our population is small and we have many areas where we have numerous people seriously spread out compared to many other countries. We are trying to make the network operators upgrade the infrastructure but not make any more money or charge us any extra. It just does nto really work

Alas the reality that money talks is very true.

Why has one exchange being upgraded and another not? No idea, but with 5500 exchanges to look after and remembering that the original ADSL roll-out too five years then it is no surprise that WBC is not fast

TalkTalk started its LLU rollout in 2006, 5 years later it is still rolling out. Also with TalkTalk at the exchange you can buy off some smaller providers who buy the wholesale products from TalkTalk Business, i.e. get better customer service

In reply to a post by Andrue:

More likely if we BT was still government owned we wouldn't even have ADSL and we'd be paying far more for our bills. It amazes me how many people still think that nationalisation is a good idea.

What you forget is if not for CUT we would not have unlimited internet access.

In reply to a post by Cobra001:

I did not say that it would be any better under government control, all I said was that if it was still under government control then access for all would be an onjective which they would have to consider, under the current system access for all is not even considered when it comes to upgrading an the area network.

Fair enough, my apologies.

though i do think if bt open reach had been something like network rail we would be in a better position.

Yeah I think that properly separating BTor would be an improvement.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

My theory is that some areas will miss out on possible company investment as firms will see that they might get 20-30% of the money from sources like councils and BDUK and Welsh Assembly.

In my county we have our own urban/rural divide with the newer industrial and commercial centres to the South, agriculture to the West and the remains of the old heavy industies in the North and East. The geographical topology of the area is horrendous with steep sided valleys, narrow lanes, unstable ground from previous heavy industries etc and some very sensitive areas such as SSSI's, SSI's, A world heritage centre and a national park to traverse.

The Southern half of the area has access to just about all services including almost universal cable whilst the rest can't even begin to dream of anything other than low speed BT Wholesale based services. For many, even if it were financially viable, satellite services are unavailable because of the topography.

The local authority is attempting to offset the "divide" (Not only digital in nature) by siting the new "Shared Resource Centre" at the Northern head of the valley. This resource centre is a major "digital service centre" which has been realised by cooperation between and investment by adjacentl local authorities, regional government, Police and other emergency services, local commerce and industry and international industry leaders such as Microsoft, HP and Cisco, etc. Several international telecoms companies are also on board. The list of industry associates and investors is still a little sensitive so I'll only mention those who are already publicly associated.
Already, several data centre operators from London and Europe have expressed an interest in moving. In some cases, discussions are said to be advanced and fruitful. The SRS, although only just opened, is I believe already turning a slight profit and projections look good. All future net profits will be reinvested within the local communities.

This is all very exciting for those within the industry but it all goes straight over the heads of most ordinary mortals who, through council tax etc are investing in this. But, because of it's current and projected success, an intended spin off to the SRS known as "The Digital Valley Initiative" is now a very real proposition. The first "real" phase of the "Digital Valley" will be to provide high speed internet to the whole community via FTTH over existing national grid infrastructure.
In the meantime, Cisco and others have equipped community centres, churches and other buildings throughout the county with wireless base stations and repeaters to increase coverage. Another large corporation has linked all of this into the local authorities' etc infrastructures to form free of charge wireless intranet connections to the internet whilst a major PC manufacturing company in partnership Microsoft and others have provided cheap home computers to many residents and voluntary organisations who would not otherwise have had an internet connection of any sort.
I can get around 2-3Mb down from my bedroom at the moment although obviously, the service is pretty heavily restricted to basic usage. It's speed limited to a maximum of 4Mb down and around half a Meg up and understandably, heavily managed but, it's available and it's free!

It's envisaged that when the "Digital Valley" project is complete, every property in the area, no matter where it's situated as long as it's connected to the electricity supply, will have high speed internet access for around a fiver a month.

We have been very lucky in that an impending situation forced a usually staid couple of local authority's to completely change their current arrangements so this is basically a silver lining from a pretty dark cloud. However, local visionaries with determination, the right people in positions of power with the right contacts and the drive and vision to realise this project is what has delivered.

I'm sure that other areas will want to take a lead from us as we have proved that the finance and goodwill is there if you're prepared to work to get it. Our vision is far from fully realised yet and it won't be for some time but the huge investments made so far, the catastrophic alternative to failure and the dogged determination of those involved at all levels will I believe, ensure that the dream will be realised, and sooner rather than later.

Edited by Deadbeat (Sun 13-Mar-11 00:18:37)

The number of lines isn't the only factor. It's just one of many.

Sone ISPs are offering bonded DSL - yes, it migth cost a little more.. but if the OP can get a few more voice lines in - they could look at that option..

In reply to a post by alcockell:

Sone ISPs are offering bonded DSL - yes, it migth cost a little more.. but if the OP can get a few more voice lines in - they could look at that option..

Spending money to go faster...what a novel idea. Maybe it will catch on someday

I think you'll find that we in rural areas are subsidising cheap fast internet for you townies. We have to pay more as most rural exchanges are market 1. Faster exchanges pay less for a better service. As we HAVE TO pay more due to OfCom regulations, we should be upgraded too.

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

I think you'll find that we in rural areas are subsidising cheap fast internet for you townies. We have to pay more as most rural exchanges are market 1. Faster exchanges pay less for a better service. As we HAVE TO pay more due to OfCom regulations, we should be upgraded too.

If you dont like it then move house to a better area for broadband
No one has forced you to pay more for your internet

Oh that old chestnut again!

Yeah great idea.. we'll all move that would mean for this area that we would shut down the 2 LNG plants that provide fuel for heat and power to the national grid, the 2 oil refineries that provide fuel for the country and the new power station that will be adding to the available power to run the country. Thats without the call centres fishing industry and ferry terminals locally Some backwater I live in huh? all this heavy and hi tech industry and still last century telecoms with premium pricing.

You have to laugh at the hypocrisy. IPSC data pricing was jacked up to lever customers onto WBC, (WBC was adjusted downwards at the same time) shame that WBC isnt available on may exchanges subjected to this rip off. We hear so much bull about long lines... and yet the lines here are all capable of adsl1 so not especially long, Our WBC upgrade dates were pulled at the same time the FTTx roll out started, thats a huge coincidence huh?. A BT guy I was talking to recently reckons the figure on Sam Knows is a few years out of date and that our exchange has (easily) 10k lines so hardly a shed in the middle of a village green huh?

Poor service should see a low pricing point, its like that in every other market, The "I'm alright jack" attitude of many is laughable, I bet they wouldn't like it if their (premium speed products) pricing was taken with our costs used as a base line and thus sold at a realistic level. Clearly OFCOM agree there is an imbalance now that works against those in Market One areas as they are looking at the unfair pricing for a service that is provided on equipment that at our price point is long ago paid for.

So yes we are subsidising upgrades elsewhere both by predatory pricing and the fact that the inward investment here has been pulled while other areas that already have a significant speed advantage are getting a further upgrade, to provide cheaper services to those already well served areas.

In reply to a post by Koppo:

BT made over a billion pounds in profit last year. No-one wants to hear their viability excuses. They are clearly doing very well for themselves.

And part of that doing well is no doubt only spending where they'll get returns

Once again we see confusion with BT's USO

BT have to provide a voice capable line to your home, they don't have to provide any type of broadband service.

Sorry but that is just how it is, there are many providers that can provide internet services to your home with or without a BT line, have you complained to them also?

Once again no one is forcing you to pay that much for broad band
What you do is call your isp and tell them you dont want broad band any more and hey presto no more large internet bills

The BP petrol station 2 miles from me is 2p cheaper than the one 2 mins from me
Should i cry about that

Some big brand clothes shops are doing a deal in the next town from me but the ones in my area are not
Should i cry about that

BT is a company so remember it's shareholders first and customers second, Ofcom is as good as the FSA were with the Banks etc so don't expect any miracles from there.

It's a bit like the saying "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" when you mean "the fast get faster and the slow don't"

Remember life is full of inequalities and you won't get frustrated with BT ....... life's too short.

Clearly OFCOM agree there is an imbalance now that works against those in Market One areas as they are looking at the unfair pricing for a service that is provided on equipment that at our price point is long ago paid for.

And yet it is Ofcom that have forced this situation. Ofcom essentially ensure that BT prices in market 1 exchanges are higher because that allows LLU providers to be able to compete if they choose to unbundle that exchange. If BT prices were set at normal BT levels (ie those in market 3 exchanges) then many exchanges wouldn't get unbundled as it wouldn't have been worthwhile for the LLU providers in the first place.

So, market 1 is higher because of Ofcom wanting to "stimulate" competition. And, there is the undeniable fact that many of the market 1 exchanges are more expensive to run than many of the market 3's (due to economies of scale, length of lines, etc) - that may not be the case with your exchange but for a lot it will be.

And it could also be that the exchange itself could be expensive to upgrade for LLU/FTTx due to various factors (size of exchange, building works, issues with land ownership, local infrastructure, distance to next hop for backhaul, etc).

My exchange has about 25,000 lines and whilst we have had LLU for about 5years and ADSL for over 10 there is no sign of it being enabled for FTTx - and very few exchanges in this "affluent" south coast county have any FTTx announced.

In reply to a post by Koppo:

The North/South Wales divide is particularly irksome. Most of the infrastructure investment takes place around Cardiff and Swansea. Loads of little exchanges around Cardiff, far smaller than ours, are state of the art. North Wales gets next to nothing. Unless you are Hawarden, or one of the chav-centrals (Rhyl, Wrexham).

Errrr, whatever your views on 'chavs', I think you need to check your facts before commenting on Wrexham/Wrecsam.

Wrexham has around 20K lines, Wrexham North another 10K lines, but until last year there was no service from Sky for ADSL, and even now, neither exchange is listed for FTTC. I agree N Wales is being left behind by what's going on in S Wales, and agree it is very annoying. To me, the inclusion of Hawarden is more because BT will lose out to O2/BE unless they can offer reasonable (OK, HIGH !) speeds.

Wrexham has council HQ, hospital and university plus sufficient numbers to presumably make it worthwhile over time, and probably would have the demand if the facility was to be offered. Thing is that it is not being offered, and no dates even rumoured yet.

Seeing Middlewich (Cheshire) and Bagshot (Surrey) with fewer than 10K lines, and some exchange in S Wales with only 2.5K lines, really annoys me, and I'd like someone to interview Ms Ann Beynon (Director, BT Wales) to get some explanation about it all. Article in Daily Post in January suggested FTTC yet I think she meant ADSL 2+ as no mention of 40 Mbps was made.

In reply to a post by Koppo:

The North/South Wales divide is particularly irksome. Most of the infrastructure investment takes place around Cardiff and Swansea. Loads of little exchanges around Cardiff, far smaller than ours, are state of the art. North Wales gets next to nothing.

The fact that the BT network in Cardiff/South Wales etc. is so modern is likely to have more to to do with the fact BT trialled its 21CN network there.

Which means they probably have the newest exchanges and kit in the UK..

Regards
Sunil

In reply to a post by gt94sss2:

Which means they probably have the newest exchanges and kit in the UK..

Don't worry.....In a few years we'll all be able to laugh at them and their 1st generation old equipment

I am in a city area and the same boat, both leics and nottingham not in plans at all.

yet little seaside towns and villages getting FTTC hahaha.

BT crumbled to the rural brigade and political pressure, awaiting a nice tax break soon I guess.

I live in about as far south of Wales as you can without being in the sea, and our exchange doesn't have anything more than ADSL max. We have a few FTTC exchanges around here, but not all of South Wales has FTTC.

Edited by deleted (Wed 15-Jun-11 14:08:56)

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I am in a city area and the same boat, both leics and nottingham not in plans at all.

yet little seaside towns and villages getting FTTC hahaha.

BT crumbled to the rural brigade and political pressure, awaiting a nice tax break soon I guess.

Hi, don�t be a spoilsport! It�s nicer for the engineers to work in the countryside and at the seaside in the summer.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I am in a city area and the same boat, both leics and nottingham not in plans at all.

yet little seaside towns and villages getting FTTC hahaha.

BT crumbled to the rural brigade and political pressure, awaiting a nice tax break soon I guess.

I wish! This whole county is still waiting for WBC/21cn let alone FFTx/LLU

As ever the usual suspect get a second or third upgrade - its about time our second rate service was dropped in price to reflect the bargain basement performance levels.

Sure as hell this area isnt getting any investment.

In reply to a post by gwaelod:

I live in about as far south of Wales as you can without being in the sea, and our exchange doesn't have anything more than ADSL max. We have a few FTTC exchanges around here, but not all of South Wales has FTTC.

You have more than we have here in South West Wales. the nearest LLU to us is about 40 miles east in the next county.

According to this BT had originally thought that 21CN would be in place by 2011 country-wide

I don't expect to see my 20CN exchange upgraded in the next ten years

In reply to a post by Apprentice:

According to this BT had originally thought that 21CN would be in place by 2011 country-wide

I don't expect to see my 20CN exchange upgraded in the next ten years

They are probably spending the money on FTTx rollouts for those who already have faster services, leaving the remaining market one exchanges staggering along on old tech equipment. Time for tourist class service to command a tourist class price! Only in Broadband do we see the ludicrous situation where those on the slowest services with the oldest tech pay the most for the privilege of being taken for granted and milked with high charges .

Edited by deleted (Thu 16-Jun-11 17:49:54)

That it would appear is exactly what they are doing, which is why it is important the government help with the rollout of faster services in rural areas, hopefully non BT but unlikely given the state of things, I'm not sure giving BDUK £830m is enough though, I think they are underestimating how important 'broadband' will become.

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

We have to pay more as most rural exchanges are market 1.

No, you pay exactly the same prices as any other user.

In reply to a post by tri_hard:

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

We have to pay more as most rural exchanges are market 1.

No, you pay exactly the same prices as any other user.

For example if your ISP was Plusnet you would pay less per month for their BB packages if your exchange was market 2 and even less if it was classified as market 3 compared to if the exchange was market 1.
Other ISPs using the same BT IPStream set up don't necessarily pass on the savings as Ofcom probably hoped they would with the presence of LLU providers in exchanges classified as mkt2 and mkt3.

In reply to a post by tri_hard:

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

We have to pay more as most rural exchanges are market 1.

No, you pay exactly the same prices as any other user.

Not a totally accurate contradiction.

1) ISPs pay less for broadband service to their customers on M3 exchanges. (I'm not sure about M2). Only one that I know of passes this reduction onto their customers - Plusnet. On all other BT-Wholesale ISPs, as you say they pay the same. Such ISPs make a higher profit from their M3 customers, so those in fact subsidise the M1 customers.

2) There is a correlation between being WBC-enabled, (BT 21CN/ADSL2+), and Market classification. Several ISPs charge the customer less on WBC connections as the costs are lower. Which subsidises which is another question.

3) The fact an exchange is M2/M3 means by definition that LLU is available. Nearly all the LLU companies charge less than BT Wholesale ISPs, or give more for the money. This is a major problem for M1 residents, as those options are not available to them.

If you think that if you get a slower service you should pay less then you would have to pay more as your line will be logner there for cost more to maintain and provide.

Also cost to ISP is not based off how fast you can go but by the combined requirments of all their line over the month

It cheaper for them to have someone who hardly ever uses the net, on a 20 meg connect than someone who used the net heavily on a 2 meg connection. As that 2 meg user would use way more of the pip capcity

In reply to a post by Apprentice:

According to this BT had originally thought that 21CN would be in place by 2011 country-wide

I don't expect to see my 20CN exchange upgraded in the next ten years

I thought BT had effectively stopped their 21CN rollout (which is different to the ADSL2+ WBC rollout)?

This page shows the number of households who can get ADSL2+ increasing from 55% (circa 14m) in April 2010 to 80% (circa 20m) by the end of 2011. The 80% target was publically announced in April and once its been done I expect BT will continue to roll it out to more exchanges

FWIW I believe different parts of BT are responsible for rolling out FTTC and ADSL2+.

Regards
Sunil

No.

Plusnet change the same for a given package regardless of your physical location. Thats my point. Its irrelevant what Plusnet pay BT or anyone else as the consumer gets the same deal everywhere in the UK where a service is provided.

You are not quoted a price by an ISP for a standard broadband connection, based upon your location.

In reply to a post by tri_hard:

No.

Plusnet change the same for a given package regardless of your physical location. Thats my point. Its irrelevant what Plusnet pay BT or anyone else as the consumer gets the same deal everywhere in the UK where a service is provided.


You are not quoted a price by an ISP for a standard broadband connection, based upon your location.

I'd recommend checking before posting with such certainty...

http://www.plus.net/

Scroll down a bit to the "Pricing" heading.

You seem to have missed the point I was making.... it isn't about Speed provided to individual lines.. its about exchanges that remain in IPSC especially as WBC roll out seems to have stalled in many areas.

My "long" line is a shade under 2 miles... the speed around here is governed by the fact that we have been bypassed for WBC - the dates for this county being withdrawn around the same time as the FTTx roll out started.

The exchange stats on sam knows are well out of date - according to a couple of BT guys I have spoken to it now has in excess of 10k lines. Hardly a tiny exchange on a village green in the middle of nowhere. There is LLU here for college and Local Authority use. My ISP sells by Peak allowance so there is a ceiling on use for most people. There is a price difference between WBC and IPSC that was designed to provide leverage to to ISPs to move to WBC - assuming you have WBC access to enable a move.

The anomaly is shown by the differing prices charged by Plus net.

Edited by deleted (Sun 19-Jun-11 17:38:55)

Post deleted by Spetznaz

BT_Care (a BT Broadband ISP representative) even claimed that by 2010 all exchanges would be enabled for its so-called up-to 20Mbps service. This of course is simply not the case as I pointed out nearly a year ago. Almost all market-1 exchanges and many market-2 exchanges won't see 21CN for a long time to come. The only thing we will see is a deepening digital divide.

I stand corrected - I apologise for my error.

One point does not however make a line or a pattern.

Apart from Plusnet then ......

IIRC I thought that ADSL2+ from BT Wholesale was due to reach around 80% of the population this year?

In reply to a post by adebov:

Don't worry.....In a few years we'll all be able to laugh at them and their 1st generation old equipment

Maybe in a decade or so - I think that BT have stopped their 21CN voice roll-out..

Regards
Sunil

I don't think it matters how close your nearest LLU or FTTC exchange is if yours doesn't have either.

stand corrected

however if it was differnt pricing structure based off what you have access to one would find the people would be without broadband because there will be a price point when its not worth providing broadband as they will not make a profit, and upgrading to a higher capable infrastructure would not make business sense.

The question would then be do you want to pay what you pay not for what you have or pay nothing and have nothing

Hi,

would anyone know when Eastbourne, East Sussex BN22 will be upgraded? i have looked all over and cant find any useful information

Thanks

Currently shows as 2012

http://www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/products/super-...

Think yourself luck. I'm fed from Hampden Park exchange. It's not shown for FTTC, & not showing anywhere for 21CN/WBC even

There is still 4 more years of the roleout to go, so lots of time still.

My question is why am I paying far more for services via an exchange that has had no upgrade investment for several years where others have had one or more upgrades and have cheaper bandwidth due to an artificial price structure that was skewed in favour of the faster services?

WBC was due here early this year.. then at FTTx rollout start the dates were withdrawn. The reason has never been explained, and the onvious conclusion is that eithert the cash or logistics have been diverted to the FTTx roll out - leaving us on last gen services - probably "because they can"

FTTx shows no sign of penetrating west of Swansea... so thats 2 whole counties at least left out.

because if it came down to you system you would find that you had no connection at all because it would not be worth their money providing it

In reply to a post by warweezil:

My question is why am I paying far more for services via an exchange that has had no upgrade investment for several years where others have had one or more upgrades and have cheaper bandwidth due to an artificial price structure that was skewed in favour of the faster services?

WBC was due here early this year.. then at FTTx rollout start the dates were withdrawn. The reason has never been explained, and the onvious conclusion is that eithert the cash or logistics have been diverted to the FTTx roll out - leaving us on last gen services - probably "because they can"

FTTx shows no sign of penetrating west of Swansea... so thats 2 whole counties at least left out.

I share the exact same views as you regarding the fact that Market 1 exchange customers pay more than Market 3 exchange customers despite the fact that Market 3 customers can use up more bandwidth than Market 1 customers.

Only thing we can do is wait it out until BT decide to upgrade our exchanges or until an LLU provider comes along (Although, as I personally know and have proof of, LLU providers do NOT always go for the large exchanges first - Especially TalkTalk).

I maybe 6' under in 4 years time

In reply to a post by MadMan:

I maybe 6' under in 4 years time

Hi, don�t get too down in the dumps! BT must be doing something right they have just enabled WBC 21CN at my small exchange one month ahead of schedule, and I am now on it. http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/CMKNO

Look up when WBC ADSL2+ will be available at your exchange https://www.btwholesale.com/pages/downloads/Communit...

https://www.btwholesale.com/pages/static/Community/B...

WBC 21CN is BT�s answer to LLU http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholesale_Broadband_Con...

In reply to a post by E7er:

WBC 21CN is BT�s answer to LLU http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholesale_Broadband_Con...

That gave me a nice chuckle. I gather you don't know what MadMan's job was until recently .

WBC isn't showing up, for my exchange.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

In reply to a post by E7er:

WBC 21CN is BT�s answer to LLU http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholesale_Broadband_Con...

That gave me a nice chuckle. I gather you don't know what MadMan's job was until recently .

LOL

It was due for WBC on the day that I was due to retire, 31/3/2010 (as it was I retire 9 months earlier, coz BT paid me to go).
Half way through march 2010, it disappeared off Samknows. A few months later it reappeared for 31/1/2011.
Yep, you guessed it, half way through jan 2011, it disappeared again, never to return

That's not a small exchange (is it??). If it is, mine isn't even on the map!

http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/LVWTW

My exchange isn't on the planned list for anything at the moment lol. Silly BT!

Edited by chris6273 (Tue 21-Jun-11 15:22:45)

My local exchange supplies around 230 premises, the nearest large community's exchange which is about 25 miles away supplies around 670 premises.

The exchange and others in this area got ADSL Max status enabled on 31/03/2006 (according to SK)

I guess we won't be getting any further upgrades of any sort for quite a while if at all

My exchange (Kilmarnock) has 25,500 residential lines and nearly 1,000 business lines and we're not getting FTTC anytime soon!

In reply to a post by E7er:

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I am in a city area and the same boat, both leics and nottingham not in plans at all.

yet little seaside towns and villages getting FTTC hahaha.

BT crumbled to the rural brigade and political pressure, awaiting a nice tax break soon I guess.

Hi, don�t be a spoilsport! It�s nicer for the engineers to work in the countryside and at the seaside in the summer.

good point

Warminster is getting FTTC
Salisbury not on list
Well that makes sense...

Are you another member of the official BT supporters club?.

It was due for WBC on the day that I was due to retire, 31/3/2010 (as it was I retire 9 months earlier, coz BT paid me to go).
Half way through march 2010, it disappeared off Samknows. A few months later it reappeared for 31/1/2011.
Yep, you guessed it, half way through jan 2011, it disappeared again, never to return

Sounds like a few Exchanges In Pembrokeshire - all smaller than mine (10k lines) - which had WBC dates fixed then withdrawn... but today I gave up trying to understand how this broadband stupidity works...

Sky have unbundled a small exchange of 3200 lines, in a village that is half empty for half the year, and that is the only consumer level LLU here. Updata are in 6 exchanges... but thats the one we just get to pay for via taxation. no consumer level service there.

Edited by deleted (Wed 22-Jun-11 15:59:41)

Montfort exchange Leicester
16,570 residential premises
1,726 non-residential premises

Leicester Central Exchange
16,454 residential premises
2,120 non-residential premises

Both missed from the FTTC roll out so far.

Narborough Exchange
10,142 residential premises
480 non-residential premises

Stoneygate Exchange
9,333 residential premises
386 non-residential premises


Kirby Muxloe
6,271 residential premises
157 non-residential premises.

All have FTTC being rolled out now.

Anyone who moans that they are being missed beause they arent in a "city" take a look at the East Midlands.

Obviously a "commercial" decision!

I just ignore them, you cant talk to some people. our aging ADSL1 gear has been more than paid for, we are ripped of for data costs, while urban areas get services which all the analyst's seem to agree are being sold below their value while seeing a second uplift in service (fibre).

Well if the goverment wants to hand over money to BT to match there investment, then more areas will appear on the list.

At the end of the day the roleout goes till 2015, its all private investment by BT at current with some area's using there BDUK money if they go with BT.

Just have to wait, fibre will come it takes time to bring it to places.