Hyperoptic Supply 1Gbps Broadband to UK Homes Developed by A2Dominion
Fibre optic ISP Hyperoptic has today agreed a new supply deal with residential property developer A2Dominion, which means that homes across their housing portfolio in London and the South East of England will soon gain access to the provider’s ultrafast Fibre-to-the-Building (FTTB/P) network.
The majority of residential properties built by A2Dominion (sometimes also known as FABRICA) represent large buildings (multi-dwelling units) with lots of flats and, as usual, Hyperoptic’s service will only be installed in those that consist of over 50 units (apartments).
Initially the FTTP/B service will be installed across 43 sites within A2Dominion’s property portfolio (both existing and new sites) and work has already begun. No doubt this will help to support the ISP’s existing goal of extending their network to over 500,000 UK “homes” by the end of 2018 2019.
Doreen Wright, Group Development Director at A2Dominion, said:
“In the past we’ve had very little control over what broadband and telephone services our residents could opt for. It was a broadband postcode lottery depending on the available existing broadband infrastructure at each site.
Our larger sites will now have the best available telecoms connectivity thanks to our collaboration with Hyperoptic, giving our residents the best possible solution for all their broadband and telephone needs.”
David Walker, Hyperoptic’s Head of Property, said:
“Digital infrastructure is now on par with physical. Having fast and reliable broadband just isn’t something they can compromise on – it’s an essential utility that affects their quality of life.
The property sector understands this; which is why we work alongside the biggest and best property companies in the UK and why we have become standard addition to the scheme designs of many of the larger developers. We are thrilled to add A2Dominion to this coveted list and look forward to the resident feedback as we roll our service across its portfolio.”
Hyperoptic typically offers a choice of three premium packages (20Mbps, 100Mbps and 1Gbps) and their network is already present around 20 UK cities and towns including in London, Birmingham, Glasgow, Cardiff, Bristol, Reading, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham, Newcastle, Nottingham, Brighton, Portsmouth, Watford, Leicester, Southampton, Slough, Edinburgh and Woking etc.
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on Twitter, Google+, Facebook and Linkedin.
« Buckinghamshire UK’s Phase 2 “Fibre Broadband” Roll-out Given £800K Boost
Mobile Operator Orange is Selling Most of its 4% Stake in BT »
Comments are closed.
Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message. By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your comment content, display name, IP, email and / or website details in our database, for as long as the post remains live.
Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.
NOTE 1: Sometimes your comment might not appear immediately due to site cache (this is cleared every few hours) or it may be caught by automated moderation / anti-spam.
NOTE 2: Comments that break our rules, spam, troll or post via known fake IP/proxy servers may be blocked or removed.
Can I clarify something regarding “who pays”..
Logically, anyone installing broadband infrastructure to service multiple homes, especially if it’s the only infrastructure, is going to do rather well out of this over the years. The provider continues making money out of the deal long after the developer has ceased to profit.
So logically, the payer should be the infra provider. And yet, apparently, in the past, BT seems to have expected some sort of contribution or funding from the developer.
Is that purely down to an abuse of monopoly power (“BT: You pay what we want or you won’t be able to sell your houses”) which is now being rectified as there is now a choice of infra providers?
DONT think anyone has ever denied that BT easily makes there money back over time. Take there FTTC rollout bet they have already Made a fair bit of that money back.
For instance we always hear about 30-40 billion for national FTTP but like copper it would easily make its money back over next 20-30 years. But it’s just getting investors on board that are willing do long term investment.
The contribution you mention is not related to the laying of the initial infrastructure. You’re thinking of cases where developers requested copper from BT and then residents requested FTTC.
In the case of new builds the telecomms provider pays. They provide the equipment, the builder installs it to their standards, they inspect and adopt it and pay the developer.
Hyperoptic does not charge the developer for new builds (subject to a survey). The big thing for Hyperoptic is 1) the proximity to a POP and 2) the size/demand of the development.
Openreach does not abuse its monopoly position. Openreach pays developers a certain amount for the installation of fixed line services and provides all the equipment needed. This is a rate that is agreed between Openreach and the House Builders Federation.
In the past, Openreach has offered additional services (FTTx) which normally required a co-funding contribution from the developer (I believe it was normally in the region of a few hundred £ per property). Most developers try to build sites as cheaply as possible, so decided not take this up.
“requested copper”
This makes me giggle. Surely the developer goes to the telecommunications company and asks them to install their infrastructure. And as a modern telecoms company BT does just that, no?
Well, no. It’s a telephone company, isn’t it, not a telecoms company. Here are your copper phone lines. You want broadband? That’ll cost.
But that’s the point. Openreach changed their stance on pricing for FTTP for new-builds. And I can only assume this is because of emerging competition.
“Requested cheapness” is probably a better phrase for developers.
I wonder whether developers get offered kickbacks from the likes of IFNL?
@DTMsrk
“This makes me giggle. Surely the developer goes to the telecommunications company and asks them to install their infrastructure. And as a modern telecoms company BT does just that, no?”
No. The developer decides what to install, if anything, on their private property. Some still appear to prefer just to install a phone line despite being offered a premium to install FTTP, I presume this is because it’s easy for their electrical contractors to install – and they’ll sell the houses anyway.
Until people refuse to buy new homes without fast broadband, lazy developers won’t bother to provide it.
I think for a provider with significant market power – BT and maybe Virgin – there’s a Competition Act problem if they just go and install infrastructure for free. it would look an awful lot like predatory behaviour if you were on the other side of the fence as a startup or alternate network provider.
A large provider could swallow the short term cost and install stuff just to keep the competition out until the competition is no more. Lots of the rules around how Openreach do their thing, especially how they charge for stuff, are to allow space for competition for develop.
Bear in mind as well that Openreach, if they provide the infrastructure, don’t see the revenues for the services that ride the network – they only get the ‘line rental’ cost they’re allowed to charge for, which for copper is somewhere around £8 a month I think, the rest going to Sky or TalkTalk or BT’s retail division or other ISPs. Hyperoptic will get to keep a lot more of the total revenue as they don’t wholesale, so the sums must be easier to make add up I would think and importantly the payback will be much shorter.
@125uS
You’d expect altnets to be fighting each other to be the preferred provider on new builds, yet the opposite is true. As much as ofcom try to instigate competition, there appears to be little of it.
Full fibre in new build developments should be a legal requirement, IMO, it’s a shamefull waste of an oportunity otherwise.
Agreed. Make it a requirement in the planning consent so that developers are forced to act.