At the risk of inflaming everyone again...............

What are peoples views on BDUK monies being used to deliver Fibre to areas that already have blanket Virgin Media coverage.

Staffordshire have flagged Rugeley as their first switch on in April. Problem is, Virgin is already there.

Should we be using Taxpayers money to overbuild a pre-existing 'Fibre' network?

What are peoples views on BDUK monies being used to deliver Fibre to areas that already have blanket Virgin Media coverage.

This isn't permitted under EU or BDUK rules. Are you certain that all premises in Rugely have access to VM cable? It's possible that there are some areas that have no access to VM and this is where FTTC is being provided.

BT are not allowed to have a monopoly. So why should Virgin.

In reply to a post by JohnR:

BT are not allowed to have a monopoly. So why should Virgin.

This has nothing to do with monopolies but rather the use of state funding. BT are free to install FTTC where they wish to do so using their own money and are doing so wherever they see a realistic prospect of a return on their investment.

dont assume VM = great internet.

A oversubbed VM area can easily perform worse than a basic adsl max connection.

They aren't worried about throughput though, just link speed. So, if Virgin can deliver a link at over 24Mb then that is good enough (assuming it is within the affordability parameters which it should be).

So, anywhere that has a supplier that can provide greater than 24Mb link speed at a cost within the affordability limit then they should not be able to use BDUK funding to place a second connection (no matter who provides the first).

Some areas are going to be luckier than others for what ever the reasons, someone said to me the other day that it was a bit like the saying "the rich get richer while the poor get poorer" i.e. exchanges providing fast connections get faster while the exchanges providing slower speeds don't
Probably plenty of cases where this isn't a reality.

In reply to a post by Apprentice:

Probably plenty of cases where this isn't a reality.

I think you're right, there are plenty. But, you tend to hear bad experiences rather than good. And economics often suggest it is cheaper to deploy where the service is already good because the distances and infrastructure are already better to support good speeds. But, with FTTC the benefits are more seen on the outskirts of an exchange where you may shorten the line from miles to hundreds of metres - that makes a hell of a difference.

Ideally it needs stats showing the profile distribution of the uplift in speeds across the country - but this may just be too difficult to draw together.

If Staffordshire have published a map showing which areas you 'should' find that those covered by BDUK do not have VM presence.

However at the edges you may fins a cabinet covers both, some with poor ADSL and No VM some with Virgin, these will normally be in different Postcodes.

The cabinet may be covered by BDUK money, this is the councils decision if they think those without VM coverage justify the spending of the money.

The council sets the postcodes to be covered, BT chooses how to cover and which to do to meet the contractual coverage obligation.

In reply to a post by kitcat:

If Staffordshire have published a map showing which areas you 'should' find that those covered by BDUK do not have VM presence.

However at the edges you may fins a cabinet covers both, some with poor ADSL and No VM some with Virgin, these will normally be in different Postcodes.

The cabinet may be covered by BDUK money, this is the councils decision if they think those without VM coverage justify the spending of the money.

The council sets the postcodes to be covered, BT chooses how to cover and which to do to meet the contractual coverage obligation.

If I lived in Rugeley town centre, I could order 120Mbps NOW from Virgin.

The Superfast Staffordshire site says that Rugeley Town Centre is the first of their go live projects by April 2014.

Actually, the project manager said they didn't set the postcodes. BT told them where they could install Fibre within the cost envelope of the money provided.

They also failed to insist that technologies other than Fibre should be considered.

I am waiting for a reply to my email to my County Councillor, but don't expect much more than a rehash of 'we did the best we could with the money' etc.

But the council should have provided the collated list from the providers to show which areas already had superfast and were therefore not elligible. The council should have got this information from Virgin and therefore BT would have known they weren't applicable for install.

Staffordshire have flagged Rugeley as their first switch on in April.

I guess the Amazon shed needs all the bandwidth it can get�.

In reply to a post by ian72:

But the council should have provided the collated list from the providers to show which areas already had superfast and were therefore not elligible. The council should have got this information from Virgin and therefore BT would have known they weren't applicable for install.

One would hope so but I have yet to see it.

I have nothing at all against BT. There was the opportunity for other Telecomms companies to bid for the money but they did not.

I am however concerned that one way of looking at this process is that BT get to upgrade their infrastructure with 2/3rds of the cost provided by the Taxpayer.

Sure they are providing a much needed service but they will get both the coverage, the kudos and the income from renting out the network.

I think everyone should be concerned but in the end it was a political decision to force a bringing forward/expansion of rollout plans. They could have let the industry develop naturally but they made politcal promises that we would be the best, or best in europe, or best out of the big economies in europe, or next will probably be best out of the countries that have the initials UK.

its not just the staffordshire council spending money on FTTC where virgin are present, BT Openreach has also done it in my home town (KIDSGROVE) (WMKDG) where vigin have been here since the 90's

FTTC has been here for about 18 - 20 months

In reply to a post by Ianph:

its not just the staffordshire council spending money on FTTC where virgin are present, BT Openreach has also done it in my home town (KIDSGROVE) (WMKDG) where vigin have been here since the 90's

FTTC has been here for about 18 - 20 months

I suppose that if BT want to spend THEIR money bringing Fibre to an area that already has VM, thats up to them.

My concern is them spending money, 2/3 of which comes from the Taxpayer, bringing Fibre to an area already covered by VM, whilst other areas of the County are deemed too expensive to upgrade.

So nothing to do with the council then. That is not BDUK it is a decision made by BT and funded by BT.

So is this definitely targetting areas that ONLY have Virgin? Is it that the cabinets supply people that don't have Virgin and it is natural spill over (which is allowed) or are they cabinets that only supply Virgin customers in which case it is not allowed?

http://maps.thinkbroadband.com/?utm_source=mainsite&...

There does appear to be gaps in the Virgin Media coverage, so the BDUK work might just amount to one cabinet covering the Market Street area - at least looks possible from a cursory glance.

The State Aid rules will be worked out at the cabinet level, i.e. so some overlap with existing fast services is allowed, but not if the majority of premises on a cabinet already have access to something better. In which case the call becomes harder.

Rugely Town Centre is based around Horsefair.

Can't honestly see many gaps!!!

In reply to a post by knighton:

What are peoples views on BDUK monies being used to deliver Fibre to areas that already have blanket Virgin Media coverage.

Staffordshire have flagged Rugeley as their first switch on in April. Problem is, Virgin is already there.

Should we be using Taxpayers money to overbuild a pre-existing 'Fibre' network?

I've never been offered a Virgin blanket , can it be used for Smoke signals ??