Indeed it is a mess and the chances of getting public money are zero at this point. Not even Defra RCBF funding is allowed to be used for FWA.
Here is something of interest as many consider Kijoma's concerns are unjustified and just "whining".
This is an extract from a Q/A response between Myself and The Broadband Program manager for West Sussex County Council. This is where Kijoma is based (West Sussex) and where we have the most extensive coverage, including the three "non ADSL" unviable exchanges. (for over 7 years)
Kijoma response/point in Italics, WSCC response in quotes.
"Funding is not easy to find but we have sought funds for infrastructure projects from both UK government and European sources. I am informed by my officers that the current bids for funding that there was a requirement for projects to be based on “open access” networks."
I agree funding is not easy to find, Our primary grievance is with WSCC's drive to spend funding aimed at improving broadband not spots on areas which are NOT notspots , this would be depriving other areas that are notspots from using this revenue wisely. You have plenty of not/poor spots in the county still in desperate need that could better utilise those funds and to far greater effect.
WSCC Broadband manager :-
"In the limited time allowed for this specific funding bid, WSCC took the view that the ADSL upgrade was something that would open up competition in those areas with no open access to broadband. It is unlikely that the offering in the areas would be as fast as the Kijoma closed access offering so would be more likely to appeal to those wanting minimal level of service.
"My view of "not-spot" is that strictly speaking there is nowhere in the UK (or for that matter Western Europe) that has no coverage for broadband It is possible (although potentially very expensive) to access a broadband service by satellite, wireless or ethernet absolutely everywhere. "
"In my interpretation, I have taken that a not-spot is any location where there is no open access, reasonably priced service provided
. I am aware that hard to reach and less commercially viable locations demand a premium from ISPs and the phrase “reasonably priced” would normally exclude bi-directional satellite,
Ethernet (“leased line”) or synchronous services. "
Broadband speeds of less than 2Mbps should probably be included in the definition but I have created the phrase "not-a-lot spots” for those areas.
In the case of the non-ADSL exchanges, I accept that Kijoma has coverage in those areas and that the prices are appropriate. However, a closed access service does make these locations, in my view, “not-spots” by the definition I am using.
I have emboldened significant statements that raise more questions about the decision process and why one persons view is allowed to define a LA strategy without sufficient research.
This extract of a 3 page Q/A response from the Council Leader and the Broadband Program manager at WSCC is from 2010 . Dialogue after this was limited and numerous offers to discuss what Kijoma provides, see it in action, talk to customers etc.. were declined.
Who would "want a minimal service" , i.e. one slower than 2 Mbps . Why are they able to fund ADSL exchanges, especially if the potential benefactors will receive under 2 Mbps (Especially the case for the East Marden and Sutton exchanges as they cover a wide area and possibly via aluminium cables).
We have had to have them remove at least 6 statements from their pages since 2010 that intentionally degrade our service , including :-.
"Although some areas have access to a wireless service, they do not have the benefit of a fixed line service"
"Wireless is available in some areas but the pricing is similar to Ethernet"
Publishing a complete county coverage map that omits ALLkijoma coverage.
The mention of Virgin Cable by name on the http://www.westsussex.gov.uk/living/broadband_west_s...
website has been removed recently so even they have been filtered out of the equation, in name at least. Kijoma never has been named or quoted.
Understandably the 7 or is it 14 or is it 24 Million (it varies) they are going to spend on Broadband in the county is causing a lot of uncertainty with those commercial providers excluded from the equation such as Kijoma.
Our response at the moment is to see what happens and reduce or freeze any expansion/investment that has a lengthy ROI in West Sussex until we see what comes out of this public spending fiasco.
Meanwhile we will concentrate on installing new network demand outside this county in places that don't have a closed shop attitude so we have less eggs in one basket , i.e. reduce the risk, as any sensible business would do.
This of course will slow the installation of customers in West Sussex as we divert resources elsewhere. But that's the inevitable product of the uncertainty presented by the current BDUK/WSCC Broadband Framework and strategy.
So like Anglia Broadband, we will carry on installing where demand requests it. Where the risks are manageable and preferably without the uncertainty. element. Just like a profitable commercial company should
Bill Lewis - MD
Kijoma Broadband - (Division of Kijoma Solutions Ltd)
Fixed wireless ISP - ISPA/CISAS/RIPE members