By: MarkJ - 14 December, 2011 (7:59 AM) - Score: 10612 - Fixed Line Broadband, Mobile Broadband, Video, Statistics
Telecoms regulator Ofcom UK has today released its sixth annual 2011 International Communications Market Report (ICMR), which looks at the adoption, availability and the use of broadband, landlines, mobiles, TV and radio across 17 different countries. It reveals that availability of superfast broadband in the UK "compares favourably" to other European countries; but not for uptake.The ICMR claims that 59% of UK households now have access to a Virgin Media or BT based superfast broadband ISP service (defined as 24Mbps+ by the UK government and 30Mbps+ in the EU), yet just over 4% of UK households subscribed to superfast services in June 2011.
The UK uptake figure (4%) breaks down to 3.5% for cable (Virgin Media) and 0.8% for BT's FTTC services, which compares poorly with 40% in Japan and 10% in the USA, although it's still higher than Germany (3%), Spain (2.2%) and Italy (1.5%).
It's been well documented that the typically higher prices of superfast broadband services, not to mention the fact that they're often deployed into areas that can already receive a good connection via existing means, has stifled its uptake. Somewhat worryingly the EU recently suggested that one way to change this would be to force consumers into upgrading by making existing internet connections more expensive (here).
Likewise major ISPs, such as O2 , Sky Broadband and Orange UK, have failed to launch their own superfast services; often due to a lack of unbundled ( LLU ) style alternatives to BT's own FTTC offerings. Never the less we would have hoped for better uptake by now, although many people may not even be aware that they're covered.
Thankfully there's better news on the Mobile Broadband front with 46% of UK people using their mobile phones to access the Internet, which is higher than in all the other countries surveyed. Smartphone and mobile data usage in the UK has also grown by 124% in 2010, which compares with a global rate of 159%.
The UK also does well when it comes to value for money, with a typical family bundle of fixed phone, four mobiles, fixed broadband and basic pay TV services costing on average about £114 per month. This might seem like a lot put it puts us second only to France, which charges just £79 for a similar bundle. Prices for this bundle in the UK increased by 10% between 2010 and 2011, largely due to mobile service price hikes.
As usual Ofcom's ICMR report is huge and thus very difficult to summarise, so here are a few of the highlights.
Ofcom's 2011 ICMR Report Highlights
* Just 19% of UK broadband subscribers used services such as Skype to make internet phone calls, compared with 28% in Italy and 26% in France.
* UK consumers spent an average of £434 on telecoms services in 2010.
* 27% of UK internet users claim to access TV content over the web every week, which is the highest claimed usage among the countries surveyed.
* 13% of consumers in France claim to have a connected TV, compared to 9% in Australia and 7% in the UK and US.
* Global communications sector revenues increased by 3.4% in 2010 to £1,132bn - a record high, with the UK communications sector generating £39bn of revenues in 2010 (3rd largest in Europe behind Germany, £49bn, and France, £44bn).
Ofcom's 2011 International Communications Market Report (PDF)
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/market-data/communications-market-reports/cmr11/international/
Tweet
Comments: 36
cyberdoylePosted: 14 December, 2011 - 9:15 AM
Link to comment
For those who have a fairly good connection next to an exchange there won't be much difference so they won't change. (as you say).
I also think folk have been conned so often with the 'upto' farce that if their current connection is sufficient for their needs they will stick with it. We will have to wait until all have access to a decent connection before the internet will be used to its full potential.
We will have a long wait, as the telcos aren't interested in any area that doesn't return high profits. What they don't seem to grasp is that the rural areas will have much higher take up as so many are desperate for connectivity and although ROI may take longer it is the way forward to build a digitalbritain.
MarkJPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 9:19 AM
Link to comment
Good point about the 'up to' issue, apathy could well play a part as ordinary folk are less likely to trust the bold claims of superfast broadband.
dragoneastPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 9:45 AM
Link to comment
I don't think it's so much apathy, as that most "normal" people (by which I exclude the speed freaks and early adopters who live on the forums, and people whose employment is IT) don't see the need for it. And that's a conscious choice. However much they're bossed by advertising, politicians, TTs doorstep sellers and others who think they ought to want it . . .
Greg KPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 10:09 AM
Link to comment
I'm one of those "not normal" people who works in IT as a software developer. I don't play any online games, or torrent many files.
I'm on VMs 10Mb broadband, for browsing, email, watching YouTube, ssh and the occasional small download this connection is more than sufficient for my wife and I. If I do need to grab the latest Ubuntu ISO or Windows/OS X update, I'm patient enough to wait 10-15 minutes.
The inconvenience of waiting for content doesn't present itself for most once we exceeded 4Mb/sec connections. Until it's the norm to stream all TV content online in HD I can't see your average consumer wanting to upgrade to 'superfast' broadband.
Maybe when we have kids consuming bandwidth simultaneously this will change.
Big BadJohnPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 10:51 AM
Link to comment
Do you think that this would change if more rural areas were to be offered the choice, as most of the exchanges that have been chaged are in mostly urban areas.
Also do we know what the take up of 21CN / WBC is currently as this is still being rolled out also ?
Devlin RosePosted: 14 December, 2011 - 11:00 AM
Link to comment
I think Greg C has hit the nail on the head.IE unless you need it for business or you have this need to download movies every five minutes- what an earth do you need high speed broadband for? I watch movies less and less these days so quite happy to order the DVD if need be, and quite frankly I am getting bored with the internet anyway and with spiralling prices have even been considering having it cut it off altogether.
Legolash2oPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 11:07 AM
Link to comment
They would probably have more uptake if they focused more on places with slower/bad connections.
DeductionPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 11:47 AM
Link to comment
I personally think the uptake is low because it is not as available as they make out.
Virgin covers under 50% of homes in the country, some of which still cant have 50 and 100Mb products from them.
I also dont for a second believe FTTC is anywhere near that coverage level. BT can quote exchange numbers until they are blue in the face, if say only half those on reasonably big exchanges (lets say the 20,000 and up) have a cabinet upgrade then it soon all adds up to spotty coverage.
Theres over 20,000 on my exchange and there is no way even half our town can have BT FTTC, due to lack of cabinet upgrades. Its nowhere near 1 in 2 cabinets (or 50%) that have been upgraded.
SledgehammerPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 12:08 PM
Link to comment
If the up take of FTTC continues at its present rate through to 2014/2015 BT are going to be looking at a gigantic flop.
wirelesspacmanPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 12:51 PM
Link to comment
I agree with most of the above comments. From my own experience as a very small wireless ISP I can concur that most people really do not care that much as long as the connection does what they want.
We still have a lot of customers on our 2 Mbps service, although most new customers tend to go for our lightest 5 Mbps service these days.
dragoneastPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 2:07 PM
Link to comment
It can't be a flop, so I predict that when marketing fails the "usual" incentive of higher prices for everyone will be brought into play (and disproportionately for those on non-superfast - to narrow the differential) . For every infrastructure investment - whether good or bad - the consumer always pays; and not just once, sometimes! Now listen for the denials: they've already started with the next news item.
I recall someone in the EC let the cat out of the bag, not long ago.
BerksPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 2:59 PM
Link to comment
21CN is still being rolled out, another set of exchanges have gotten dates, have to check sam knows. Mine follows it being unbunddled by TT.
BT's exchange coverage figures do vary but they do in fill and enable cabinets after the exchange has gone live.
BobPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 3:49 PM
Link to comment
Two big problems BT has foccussed it's rollout on areas that already have HS Broadband with cable & Toen Centre exchanges where line lengths are typicaly short.
The outer areas where most of the afluent homes are and where cable does not exist and line lengths are long have been ignored by BT so a low take up comes as no surprise
BT seems more intereted in playing the numbers game(ie how many homes can get it) rather then getting a good take up
deckyPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 4:14 PM
Link to comment
Amazing that only 0.6% take up in Ireland yet I live in a small town (less than 10k) and have 100mb line, cheap enough to 65 euro a month.
DeductionPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 5:10 PM
Link to comment
quote"BT's exchange coverage figures do vary but they do in fill and enable cabinets after the exchange has gone live. "
Nonsense my towns exchange has been enabled since mid(ish) 2010, less than half the well over 20,000 on the exchange can have FTTC because theres only about half a dozen or so cabinets that have had a FTTC cousin installed and 2 of those are in low population areas, a third is in a council estate area where half the houses are boarded up.
Its ridiculous and the roll out like that of prior upto 8Mb and ADSl2+ by BT is a utter joke.
DeductionPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 5:14 PM
Link to comment
The numbers BT have quoted about availability of services is utter nonsense, its all exchange based which is useless when trying to find out if an area or road can have FTTC. If you listen to BTs figures and assume everyone on an enabled exchange can have FTTC, the figures for those that could have it would probably match or exceed those that can have VM by now. There is no way in hell that is the case, based on my town and 2 neighbouring ones. All of which are high population.
BobPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 6:38 PM
Link to comment
Some of it is also down to apathy. Unless there is a good reason to upgrade many will stay where they are
BerksPosted: 14 December, 2011 - 10:45 PM
Link to comment
May be the case in you're area but the towns near me have had more cabinets upgraded, one town has 94% coverage to bduk rules.
Also local CC have delayed cabinets so there could be many reasons why theres not more cabinets enabled.
BT have enabled exchanges where there is no VM fibre, more of these areas will be enabled as the rollout progresses.
The figure BT needs is 40% take up to enable a area, beyond that more is better but not everyone wants a faster service many people are happy with what they have.
Deduction you make not like the rollout but who else is doing a rollout on this scale.
DeductionPosted: 15 December, 2011 - 12:30 AM
Link to comment
quote"May be the case in you're area but the towns near me have had more cabinets upgraded, one town has 94% coverage to bduk rules."
Must be a small town
quote"Also local CC have delayed cabinets so there could be many reasons why theres not more cabinets enabled."
Only towns that have had issues in that regard are conservation areas which are few and far between.
quote"BT have enabled exchanges where there is no VM fibre, more of these areas will be enabled as the rollout progresses."
Again utter nonsense, most enabled exchanges are towns that have considerable VM coverage. I bet you cant name 20 exchange areas with BT FTTC but no VM.
DeductionPosted: 15 December, 2011 - 12:31 AM
Link to comment
quote"The figure BT needs is 40% take up to enable a area, beyond that more is better but not everyone wants a faster service many people are happy with what they have."
As stated my exchange is already enabled, slower cabinet upgrades are the issue.
quote"Deduction you make not like the rollout but who else is doing a rollout on this scale."
Its unclear to me what the scale is as they mention only exchanges enabled as there figures not people that can get the service.
SomersetPosted: 15 December, 2011 - 9:21 AM
Link to comment
deduction - your town has 12ish cabinets covering 20,000 properties?
New_LondonerPosted: 15 December, 2011 - 2:24 PM
Link to comment
@Deduction
Quote "Its unclear to me what the scale is as they mention only exchanges enabled as there figures not people that can get the service."
IIRC the most recent quarterly results included mention of 6 million premises passed? That's around 25% of the population I think, given that the 10 million properties milestone for 2012 is meant to be around 40% coverage.
DeductionPosted: 15 December, 2011 - 6:18 PM
Link to comment
@Somerset
no, and i did clearly say not even 1 in 2 cabinets, theres a lot more than 12 cabinets in my town that need doing. Only a handful within a 5 mile radius have had upgrades, the towns biggest trading estate, housing estate and considerable sized highstreet are all examples of premises that cant get FTTC, even though the exchange has been enabled for a year now.
@New_Londoner
Where are those figures? Only figures mentioned by BT are exchange numbers not people that have a FTTC capable cabinet AFAIK a recent map on a news item on here suggests its nowhere near 25% of homes.
New_LondonerPosted: 15 December, 2011 - 9:19 PM
Link to comment
@Deduction
"Where are those figures?" Have checked and was right, it does reference 6 million premises passed in the last results. So this should only include those premises that can actually get the service, not simply the total in every exchange area.
http://www.btplc.com/news/articles/showarticle.cfm?ArticleID=b4d54086-8d06-45c5-bf8e-99f6536ef094
"Our super-fast broadband network now passes more than 6m premises and we are accelerating our roll-out programme to cover two-thirds of the UK by the end of 2014, one year earlier than planned."
DeductionPosted: 15 December, 2011 - 11:32 PM
Link to comment
That figure doesnt make sense when you look at what exchanges have been enabled and do the numbers.
BerksPosted: 15 December, 2011 - 11:57 PM
Link to comment
The town with 94% coverage is reading with all 4 of its exchanges upgraded to FTTC, so not a small town.
If you want exchanges with no VM coverage go look at NI and Cornwall alone for you're 20 plus exchanges.
BT's figures which you dont seem to understand cover the amount of homes they enable on each exchange.
There are cabinets they miss and will enable at a later date, industrial estates usualy have leased lines.
DeductionPosted: 16 December, 2011 - 3:02 AM
Link to comment
Exchange upgrades are irrelevant, how many cabinets enabled in reading? I doubt 94% of them are done. I bet i can find a business in reading that cant have FTTC very easily.
Id look in cornwall unfortunately you still seem to think an exchange enabled equals the entire area being able to get it, which isnt the case in cornwall or NI
NO they dont cover amount of homes, they cover amount of OLD connections at the exchange end, not who can and cant get fibre connections. There are no figures for amount of homes that can get FTTC figures are based on exchange connections or in other words phone lines.
Long time doing my cabinet and id guess 80% of this town then considering the exchange has been enabled for a year.
Oh and no industrial estates dont normally have lease lines for broadband, neither do high streets.
New_LondonerPosted: 16 December, 2011 - 7:28 AM
Link to comment
@Deduction
Not sure what your point is? 6 million premises passed equates to those connected to enabled cabinets or on FTTP, not whole exchange areas. No doubt the total number of premises in those exchanges would be closer to 8 million.
DeductionPosted: 16 December, 2011 - 5:55 PM
Link to comment
It doesnt add up, because last time i looked at the exchanges which have been enabled and even if every exchange connection can have FTTC/FTTP it didnt total 6 million connections. Go look at the FTTC/FTTP exchange list and add up the figures connected to the exchanges.
There is no way in hell an enabled exchange equals every one on that exchange capable of having FTTC/FTTP services, and it never will do. Villages connected to a main towns exchange in many areas being a prime example, along with business estates. There is no way in hell a quarter of homes can already have FTTC/FTTP........ A quarter of exchanges may have been done, a quarter of homes capable of getting the product..... Errrrrrr NOOOOOO
]
BerksPosted: 17 December, 2011 - 4:17 PM
Link to comment
Then why dont you go to BT and complain that there stats are wrong as you see it.
They should be able to set you straight about where there figures come from as they make them.
DeductionPosted: 17 December, 2011 - 4:25 PM
Link to comment
Not saying there stats are wrong anywhere, im saying yours are.
PhilTPosted: 18 December, 2011 - 1:13 PM
Link to comment
Takeup still points to a lack of demand, however you dress it up.
3.5% of households have fast service from cable. At least 35% of households have access to fast cable (45% + cabled in total)
Takeup = 10%. Awfully low.
DeductionPosted: 18 December, 2011 - 5:00 PM
Link to comment
Nobody doubts virgin is near 50% coverage, BT FTTC though available to over 20% of homes already as others claim, no way
MarkPosted: 20 December, 2011 - 2:56 AM
Link to comment
Well, BT would have a customer immediately (well, not BT directly, but anyway) if they just upgraded even one cabinet in Alton, Hampshire, which serves business premises, where I could lease.
Sadly, rollout complete a year ago, no businesses (that I can locate) can have it. Given that about 80% of the cabs got done, this can't be a coincidence, can it. I'm thinking they're in the "second round" for the begging bowl to be held out again.
In the meantime, it still remains the case that I'd have to travel 15 miles to get to a FTTC service (Virgin Media cable) and continue to put up with my 6Mbps 3G service which just about passes as broadband these days while the knackered old 3.6km (aliminium?) phone line here which can't do broadband (sub 2Mbps possible) remains unused for a 5th year.
DeductionPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 3:38 AM
Link to comment
Indeed mark, something ive tried to point out to certain individuals in many stories which is the case in many towns.
Exchange upgrade is meaningless if the town has no new FTTC cabinets. The BT defenders though despite the evidence from people telling them they cant have the service still whitter on about nonsense claims and high percents can get it.
ynysPosted: 2 January, 2012 - 11:53 PM
Link to comment
There should be a priority to give everyone at least basic broadband coverage (reliable 3mb or above) before the already well provided for get super duper broadband. Ultimately with the whole UK on decent connection that should help growth in many areas
Generated in 0.55444 seconds.
DB queries: 8
Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved (Terms, Privacy Policy, Links (.), Live Chat & Website Rules).