In reply to a post by witchunt:

Longer established providers may have more resilience on their networks .

Agreed 100%.... but even established organisations have failures that affect FTTP, FTTC and ADSL users. IT failures are their own complexity horizon.

Edited by jchamier (Wed 27-Sep-23 13:04:58)

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

Only time will tell if you made a good choice switching to Zzoommmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

The outages you've seen have nothing to do with the last mile being full fibre, its about you being with an altnet who may not be that good at the moment on their back end. If you had switched from Openreach FTTC to Openreach FTTP you would have probably seen the same (or better) reliability that you've had for many many years.

Even if I had altnets available to me I don't think I would switch until I could see they were reliable over a longer period of time.

I know what you mean, I was a bit annoyed since I have been on FTTC for 9 years and only one major problem, been on FTTP for like 3 months and had more than i should have.
The last outage affected other providers as well, by all accounts. Been ok since, we will see.

I don't really want to go back to Open reach now, but it seems when i try something different it comes back to bite me, like the wireless network I was on a few years agao.

We will see what happens.

I had a leaflet though the door yesterday from Talk Talk, saying full fibre is in my area, so they have finally realised that we have full fibre. even their website say we have FTTP now, only been 8 months. Not that I would go with Talk Talk if they were the last ISP in this country.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

I had a leaflet though the door yesterday from Talk Talk, saying full fibre is in my area, so they have finally realised that we have full fibre. even their website say we have FTTP now, only been 8 months. Not that I would go with Talk Talk if they were the last ISP in this country.

and TalkTalk use the Openreach FTTP (and FTTC) networks. Pretty amazing your town has both an AltNet and OpenReach FTTP already... some large towns in the south east have no sign of either.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

and TalkTalk use the Openreach FTTP (and FTTC) networks. Pretty amazing your town has both an AltNet and OpenReach FTTP already... some large towns in the south east have no sign of either.

Shocked me when Zzoomm said they were coming here, I wondered who bribed them to come here. Openreach FTTP have been here for a few years in a couple of roads, I expect they would not have bothered to expand so quickly if Zzoomm did not come here, but they thought they were missing out.
Still a fair chunk of the city where Openreach FTTP is missing. A colleague lives in a road in one of the large estates, Zzoomm, but not Openreach, he decided to stay with BT even if it was slower than go with Zzoomm. He trusts BT, (stupid boy ). Saying that, I could not recommend Zzoomm at the moment, not until they get more reliable

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

Saying that, I could not recommend Zzoomm at the moment, not until they get more reliable

Zzoom are in the small towns north of me, Crowthorne and Sandhurst.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Zzoom are in the small towns north of me, Crowthorne and Sandhurst.

They seem to be spreading very quickly, let's hope they are not expanding too quickly and run out of money.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Zzoom are in the small towns north of me, Crowthorne and Sandhurst.

They seem to be spreading very quickly, let's hope they are not expanding too quickly and run out of money.

They need to get as big as possible as quickly as their funding will allow. The more premises they pass the more customers they have reachable, the higher their potential income.

Slowing build and focusing on trying to maximise uptake in areas already passed is a signal of distress: the funding isn't there to continue building at that pace and a cash crunch is possible.

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

They need to get as big as possible as quickly as their funding will allow. The more premises they pass the more customers they have reachable, the higher their potential income.

Slowing build and focusing on trying to maximise uptake in areas already passed is a signal of distress: the funding isn't there to continue building at that pace and a cash crunch is possible.

I thought it would be a good idea to get customers where they are first, the network building is what costs the money.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

They need to get as big as possible as quickly as their funding will allow. The more premises they pass the more customers they have reachable, the higher their potential income.

Slowing build and focusing on trying to maximise uptake in areas already passed is a signal of distress: the funding isn't there to continue building at that pace and a cash crunch is possible.

I thought it would be a good idea to get customers where they are first, the network building is what costs the money.

Yes it does, and it gets more expensive if you keep stopping and starting it as you keep making a bunch of people redundant then having to rehire. Same goes for contractors: they'll charge less for longer term work over a company that keeps building in bursts then pulling back so they get more expensive.

The money they make per customer after paying for their existing interest payments and operating costs isn't going to make a dent in network build costs. Pulling back build to focus on uptake indicates that the uptake isn't high enough for investors to keep the funding taps open and there isn't enough funding already secured without covenants dependent on uptake to keep building.

Edited by XGS_Is_On (Tue 03-Oct-23 09:50:03)