» ISP News » 

Too Many New Build UK Homes Still Lack Superfast Broadband

Monday, March 5th, 2018 (12:01 pm) - Score 4,521

Over the years we’ve reported on many situations where large developments of new build homes have been constructed without including good provision for “superfast broadband” (30Mbps+) from day one. Now a new analysis of recent UK builds during 2017 suggests that the problem isn’t yet fixed.

In theory the situation should be improving, not least due to the changes that occurred between 2016 and 2017 to address the problem. Firstly, most of the major home builders (e.g. Home Builders Federation) have now entered into partnerships with network operators (e.g. BT and Virgin Media) in order to better facilitate the rollout of fibre optic (FTTP/H) and hybrid fibre (FTTC / HFC DOCSIS) based broadband technologies.

On top of that a new directive from the EU (details), which has also been adopted into UK law, is supposed to mean that all newly constructed buildings (i.e. those that gained permission after the 31st December 2016) are “equipped with a high-speed-ready in-building physical infrastructure, up to the network termination points.” The UK government has also been telling councils to ensure that they factor this into local planning approvals.

However we should point out including support for such services is only half the battle and the developer still needs to find a network operator to actually make use of the infrastructure they’ve built, which doesn’t always happen. Now a new estimate by Thinkbroadband, which examined new build postcodes, appears to suggest that around 1 in 4 to 1 in 5 of new premises are still appearing without provision for superfast broadband.

The good news is that the results show a strong rise in the proportion of developments making use of “full fibre” (FTTH/P) technology (i.e. national UK coverage is only around 3-4% but in new builds it’s more like 35%). Overall the results aren’t terrible but clearly we’re still a long way from seeing 90-100% support for “superfast“.

Area (New Premises)
% Superfast 30Mbps+ % Ultrafast 100Mbps+ % Under 10Mbps USO
UK 2018 (10,582 so far) 69.3% 36.6% 14.3%
UK 2017 (117,721) 75.8% 33.2% 12%
UK 2016 (164,467) 79.9% 29.8% 9.9%

NOTE 1: The Ultrafast percentage above will predominantly reflect coverage by FTTP/H, HFC DOCSIS (Cable) and possibly some G.fast based networks; mostly delivered via Openreach (BT) and Virgin Media. Meanwhile Hyperoptic, GTC / IFNL and a few other altnets will also have an impact.

NOTE 2: The focus on postcode level data means that smaller individual developments (usually personal projects) or property conversions aren’t likely to be factored above, although they don’t tend to attract the same requirements anyway.

NOTE 3: The data also does not include those postcodes where TBB have not determined the number of premises present or what broadband options are available, which it’s estimated could add another 40,000 to the UK total for 2017.

We should also point out that the Government has claimed 217,350 new homes were built in England alone during the 2016/17 financial year, which appears to be at odds with TBBs data but then they do have several exclusions to consider and we don’t know the precise workings of the official statistics.

Lest we also forget that new build home developments often take several years to complete after being granted planning permission, which suggests that a lot of permissions will have been granted before the new rules and guidance actually came into force. In other words we may be playing catch-up in some areas for a little while longer.

One problem here is that so long as this issue (let’s call it a negative weight against on-going coverage progress) goes unresolved then it risks casting the government’s aspiration for ensuring that 98% of the United Kingdom can access a superfast broadband connection by around 2020 into doubt. Perhaps now might be the time for a firmer hand.

Share with Twitter
Share with Linkedin
Share with Facebook
Share with Reddit
Share with Pinterest
By Mark Jackson
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, , Facebook and Linkedin.
Leave a Comment
88 Responses
  1. JustAnotherFileServer says:

    Not sure how 120.2% of new properties from 2018 can have an internet connection? Can someone explain this?

    1. Mark Jackson says:

      The above is about network availability, as should be obvious, not take-up.

    2. Devon Paddler says:


      The Ultrafast % is a subset of the +30Mbps figure

      16.4% get more than 10 but less than 30
      14.3% less than 10
      69.3% more than 30

    3. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      Mark, even if that is for availability, you can’t have above 100%?

      Devon, superfast and ultrafast should be seperate percentages and not a subset, hense why have a superfast speed and a ultrafast speed.

      It’s good to know though that it’s so unclear these figures that the writer of the article didn’t know either.

    4. Mark Jackson says:

      As Devon Paddler hinted, I think you’re adding together availability figures that are not supposed to be added together because they reflect different definitions of speed.

    5. wirelesspacman says:

      The clue is in the ‘+’ at the end of 30Mbps+ 🙂

    6. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      I think a much better way to lay those figures out would be, how many % can get Superfast 30Mbps+, how many % can get Ultrafast 100Mbps+ and also what % are only able to get Under 10Mbps. That’s how to do availability figures (well in any other type of business).

    7. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @wirelesspacman so what is it’s upto speed then?

    8. “I think a much better way to lay those figures out would be, how many % can get Superfast 30Mbps+, how many % can get Ultrafast 100Mbps+ and also what % are only able to get Under 10Mbps. That’s how to do availability figures (well in any other type of business).”

      URM that is what the data is showing, I think what you are saying is you want the superfast column to exclude those who have an ultrafast option, which would be daft given that things like Full Fibre does have superfast speed options available.

      Also there are areas with multiple options available.

    9. On the up to, the figures take into account the distance effects of VDSL2 and ADSL2+ based services.

    10. JustAnotherFileServer says:


      URM that is what the data is showing, I think what you are saying is you want the superfast column to exclude those who have an ultrafast option.

      If someone has access to both superfast and ultrafast, then it should be shown that their avaiablity is for 100Mbps+ and makes no sense to also show they have 30Mbps+ in the percentage firgures.

    11. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @Andrew One last point is that it’s speed availability, not delivery technology availability.

    12. Well I am not going to be changing anything, because it will get all too confusing


      Premise with access to FTTC at 48 Mbsp
      Same premise with access to Hyperoptic full fibre which is sold at 30 to 1000 Mbps, so has both superfast and ultrafast options.

    13. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @Andrew in your Scenario the availability would be upto 1000 Mbps then if you are just doing the speed availability (not including what tech it’s using for delivery).

    14. Gadget says:

      Actually I think the way Andrew has presented it is exactly how to answer the most often asked question “how many people have access to more then Y Mbps”, which would include Y and >Y.

    15. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @Gadget everyone who has an FTTC connection for a start. As they have a faster connection than ADSL in most cases because in general the Cabinet is closer than the exchange.

    16. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @Gadget Also I note that Andrew has seperated the figures on TBB website today. So that’s some progress.

    17. Point of order on @JustAnotherFileServer

      The original article on thinkbroadband has had zero edits, so no progress at all in how the data is shown and follows the way that we do the coverage tables every time we do one.

      So its like someone is trying to create a storm in a teacup to divert from actual issues.

    18. Mike says:

      The presentation of the figures makes perfect sense. A certain person not knowing when they are wrong though does not.

    19. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @Mike If you look at how Andrew has done the layout on the TBB website you will see that it is different to that on this website.

      Not sure why people find it difficult to compare things these days or try to argue intstead of just sticking your hand up and saying “you know what, you’re right”.

      The first step to success is being acurate and consistent.

    20. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @Andrew I did not say anything about editing or implying it for that matter. I just stated that you had the layout in your article different to this one. Twisting people’s words will only lead to arguments rather than disussions.

    21. Mike says:

      Looks like its the same figures to me. Oh and you did accuse Andrew of altering things. Regardless though the figures still make sense from the start on both websites. Its just you could not comprehend them, others understood them just fine.

    22. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @Mike I hope you never do spreadsheets as not knowing the difference between 3 columns of figures and 6 columns is pretty bad. Just saying.

    23. Mike says:

      You do not need 6 columns of figures to tell you what percent are deemed to be ‘superfast’. Trying to read each figure and combine them as a whole rather than individual figures is where you went wrong with your 120.2% error in the first place. (Which was pointed out to you).

      You do not need to worry about any ability i have, id concentrate on your own when it comes to figures. Even more so when 2 people straight after your opening post explained what the figures actually were showing and the maths involved.

      Quite clearly you did not understand what Devon Paddler, Mark Jackson or all the other posts after attempted to explain to you.

      There is a reason everyone except you can understand the information that was presented…….. JUST SAYING!

    24. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @Mike It sounds like you’ve got some anger issues that you need to work out, I can if you wish (or admit to having a problem) I can recommend places where you can get therapy for mental illness.

      I would like to point out that I do run a very successful business and have degrees in business and accounting. These allow me to be qualified into saying when figures aren’t in the proper and correct layout.

      Also as you want to argue about the six columns, then I suggest you go and look again at the way Andrew has set out his figures and you will notice that he has done six columns as apposed to the three on this site.

      I hope your CV never passes my way as it will surely get aggressively filed (i.e. placed in the rubbish bin).

    25. Mike says:

      ROFL. Classic not only does your first paragraph make no grammatical sense (the mid point and your superfluous ‘I can’ parts) but it is another failed attempt to insult. Someone I suspect indeed has anger issues, but it is not the person that can construct a full and concise paragraph in response. All while I also parentheses where it is needed and appropriate. In addition to laughing at you so hard at the same time.

      The second paragraph, more hilarity. You now think because you can count (or so you say) you know what the figures show more than the person that presented them and even though you do not need to be able to count to read. As to having a business nobody asked or even cares, you are all alone in how that even matters.

      Third paragraph as already explained to you it does not matter how many columns of data there are. Each column shows its own figure. You do not add them together, times them or whatever you and your playschool certificate for using an abacus thinks needs to be done with them.

      As for my CV, you need not worry about filing it. I have a policy, judging from a couple of your paragraphs of not allowing those with NPD to even see it in the first place.

    26. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      @Mike I feel sorry for your wife (something tells me your single though). Enough said.

  2. Tim says:

    Too many OLD homes still lack decent broadband.

  3. Joe says:

    Its all well and good talking about big home builders but large number of properties are small projects by builders or conversions into flats and just don’t get retrofitted.

    1. New postcodes need not be just big home builders, it is not uncommon to find a new postcode serving what is just six new homes with no other new postcodes nearby.

      Mark carried across our caveat about flat conversions, so not sure what the problem is.

    2. Joe says:

      I was more refering to the Gov/OR/Big housebuilders organising together. Doesn’t help the smaller projects at all.

  4. Philip Smith says:

    New build cabinet 37 Wymondham, Norfolk. 2mbps.

    1. Tony says:

      I assume you were aware of this when you handed over £100000s to the developer? If not, why didn’t you ask BEFORE buying the property.

    2. Philip Smith says:

      Friend purchased the home. Not tech savvy. I moved in and then found out afterwards. I would have assumed all new builds got FTTH.

    3. AndyH says:

      Do you have a postcode? Who was the developer? When was the house built? Was it part of a larger development?

    4. Fastman says:

      cab not in any programme — copper only site new pcp at entrance is a give away !!!!!

    5. Fastman says:

      Andy H this a long running saga — there are 2 development both the same main developer both in the same situation within .5 of a mile of each other

    6. Philip Smith says:

      NR18 OGH postcode Persimmons. However had an email today from Persimmons who now have agreed to gap fund the upgrade of the cab to provide me speeds of around 24mb? The next phase of homes on the site are all getting FTTP just the phase i’m on is half FTTC and half copper. Sadly I’m on the copper part at the moment

    7. AndyH says:

      It’s interesting that this developer has come up at least 3x on here for developments in completely different parts of the country without any form of superfast broadband.

      @ Philip Smith – I would push for FTTP with the developer. I’m not sure the cost difference (maybe Fastman can give some idea), but if there is FTTP infrastructure nearby, then it shouldn’t be economically unviable.

    8. gerarda says:

      It appears that despite the evidence that FTTC take up is heading topside of 50% Openreach still think it is a special new fangled extra and only provide the infrastructure for it on request.

    9. AndyH says:

      @ gerarda – Far from it. There are still developers who are not taking up the Openreach offer of free FTTP for builds of 30+ homes either by not applying for it at all, or by not following the correct process.

    10. Mike says:

      Openreach doing FTTP for free??? I thought it was spose to be expensive to deploy, how does that work?

    11. gerarda says:

      If Openreach was still not operating as if they were state owned monopoly they would have a sales team scouring planning applications and making sure they provided the infrastructure

    12. AndyH says:

      @ gerarda – That would be a complete waste of time and resources.

      As with any other utility, the developer needs to provide plans about their requirements before construction begins. Superfast broadband has not been on the radar for many developers when the plans were filed, so some developments have ended up with standard copper services. You also have situations where developers have refused to contribute to co-funding of superfast broadband.

    13. Fastman says:

      TP gets done on greater then 30 plots registered post 2016 with a 9 months first occupancy date from Registration as these site do not have copper (so no copper is provided only a Fibre voice product) FTTP retrospective on a copper site is much greater cost as you have already provided all the copper to the site

    14. Fastman says:

      Gerada The developer is also under no obligation to go Openreach and can choose who ever they decide – there are a number of other providers out there and ISP has covered Openreach Lockout before and I’m sure wil cover them again

      your comment around state owned monopoly is way wide of the mark that might of been the case when the business employed close to 250,000 people in the Uk (back) the mid 1980’s)

    15. Mike says:

      If Openreach are hooking up new builds with FTTP for “free” then all the developer needs to ask them for is the “free” option surely????

      Perhaps you could inform us… Which developers want to “pay” for their homes to be wired up with copper phone lines rather than have this “free” fibre option???

      Sounds a bit cuckoo to me, much like anything and everything BT advocates have to say on here.

    16. Philip Smith says:

      In regards people saying about developers getting free FTTP for new builds thats true based on number of homes. Persimmons told me even though my home was complete in 2017 it was years before there were in talks with Openreach and doing planning persimmion and at that time the FTTP offer was not FREE. However when they were doing planning for phase 2 Openreach were offering free FTTP installations. I might see what options I have to do a private run of fibre or Ethernet from the other cabinet as it really not far away or get someone to fund FTTP in homes next to the new phase (same site).

    17. AndyH says:

      @ Philip Smith

      When a developer goes to Openreach for a new build, they are given various options about the technology that can be deployed. The initial free FTTP offer was for 250 homes, this was then reduced to 100 and now 30 homes.

      If Persimmon did not meet the terms of the offer at the time of registration with Openreach, then they would have been given an offer to contribute to deploy either FTTC/P. This is based on a standard rate card that Openreach supply to developers.

      Now many developers have tried to keep their margins as high as possible so they did not agree to contribute towards FTTC/P (Persimmon is one of those developers). Some developers even sold their properties as having superfast broadband, knowing fully well that Openreach were not supplying superfast broadband.

    18. Fastman says:

      If Openreach are hooking up new builds with FTTP for “free” then all the developer needs to ask them for is the “free” option surely????
      Perhaps you could inform us… Which developers want to “pay” for their homes to be wired up with copper phone lines rather than have this “free” fibre option???
      Sounds a bit cuckoo to me, much like anything and everything BT advocates have to say on here.

      because the free fibre means that no copper gets provided on the site you you have to have an FVA voice product !!!!! and very few service providers have an FVA offering

    19. Voice is just another date service, no need for FVA.

      Subscribe to one of the many VoIP providers

    20. Mike says:

      Yep not sure what he is on about Andrew. Surely if fibre is “free” on new builds it should just be installed. Why would the developer even need to ask for something that by default is free?. Even if they did have to request it, why would they request copper at all if that costs them money and fibre does not? It does not make any sense.

    21. Fastman says:


      the developer still has to accept the FTTP offer

    22. Mike says:

      What gets installed if they do not ask for this “FREE” fibre? If the answer to that is nothing that also makes no sense.

    23. Fastman says:


      if they do not accept then copper gets installed !!!!!

      you cannot provide a developer with nothing

    24. Fastman says:

      the developer does not pay — the developer get paid via the SOD payment

      so every more surreal

    25. Mike says:

      Why are BT still installing copper when EU and goverment direction say they should not? No wonder there is 1 in 4 not supplied with fibre. Down to BT again, the developer for new builds should not even need to ask for fibre.

    26. TheFacts says:

      How would I sign up for an ISP that does not support fibre in a fibre only property?

    27. Mike says:

      “How would I sign up for an ISP that does not support fibre in a fibre only property?”

      Why would you want to do that? Thats like being offered a Rolls Royce instead of a Dacia.

      Plus most even half known ISPs have a Openreach based FTTH product for those lucky enough to actually have it available.

      Beginning to think you do not have a point or an explanation why this “Free” fibre is not being installed by default.

    28. TheFacts says:

      7 ISPs offer FTTP to the home.

    29. Mike says:

      Your information is either out of date or made up.
      1) BT
      2) Talk Talk
      3) Zen
      4) Direct save Telecom
      5) IDNet
      6) ICUK
      7) AAISP
      8) Spectrum Internet
      8) Stream Networks
      9) Structured Communications
      10) Entanet

      That is just off the top of my head I can name another 2 without thinking if you want.

    30. Kelvin says:

      Clearly out of date info IDNet and Direct save have done FTTP/H for residential premises for a while. Have had my residential FTTH with them for a while.

  5. Joe M says:

    Why is everyone calling for “broadband”?

    Surely it is safer to call for “1Gbit symmetric fiber Internet” or “lowest cost best value Internet node” which just happens to be 1gbit fiber Internet. It can be deployed 20x time faster than “broadband” because it needs copper wire to be installed from the cabinet which needs brick lined tunnels for water ingress protection and lightening protection while fiber costs £2 per meter for 100+ cores, can be joined with fusion splicers in under 3 minutes with 0.01db loss for $1000, and the 1gbit SFP fiber modems are $14 (while 10gbit is under $20). All the rate limiting, buffering etc is done in fiber routers which start at a cost of around $600.

    If you don’t know enough, you would only use the most expensive equipment out there and quote massive expense that may have been valid yesterday, but today millions of fiber homes are being delivered per year and the equipment for provisioning all that does not start with a £30,000 router if you have any common sense.

    So please, stop calling for 20x expensive and slow to provision “broadband” and instead call for best fiber node or 1gbit fiber Internet in new builds. And please let the fiber companies quote their prices. It is not an accident that companies like B4RN to Hyperoptic charge £30 to £50 for 1gbit fiber Internet and making loads of money and expanding fast. They are cheaper to provision and quicker to provision than broadband.

    1. TheFacts says:

      @JM – this is similar to your previous post and you have not noted the comments.

      Why are you using $, are you in the US? ‘brick lined tunnels for water ingress protection’ is nonsense.

      B4RN have significant amounts of free labour and wayleaves and Hyperoptic have a particular business profile that works for them.

      You are confusing new build and upgrading. You need to explain where a £30k router is being used and by whom.

  6. Jigsy says:

    What do you expect when BT Openreach still choose to lay copper cabling to new build properties?

    1. Fastman says:

      premises registered post 2016 with a 9 months first occupancy date post registration get g FTTP as statdrad with no copper the issue is those registered in 2014 and 2015 who only asked for voice services (when they had an option to do something else if they had wanted to/ contracted for

    2. Mike says:

      So every new build registered from 2016 onward has FTTP? What a load of nonsense.

    3. Fastman says:

      those greater than 30 plots with a 9 months first occupancy date from registration in February 2016 for 200 and same for 30 plots registered November 16 (with the same caveat 30) should be FTTP

      you clearly did not read the post or you are on a site registered pre 2016

    4. Mike says:

      Except for the 1 in 4 (or 25%) the news item mentions eh?

    5. New_Londoner says:

      @Jigsy, Mike
      The issue here is that developers decide what to install on their sites, they make the decision whether to have copper or fibre broadband, or both. Sadly even some well known, national developers take shortcuts, presumably because the houses sell anyway.

      In the absence of legislation, some simple education of buyers to ask questions about broadband before buying, rather than making assumptions, could make a difference. As could a bit of naming and shaming of the worst offenders.

      Either way, this is not down to network providers, it’s the developers that need to take action.

    6. Mike says:

      Again… Except for the 1 in 4 (or 25%) the news item mentions eh?

  7. Fastman says:

    mike depends when they were registered and how they there were registered but as there are no specifics on what the 25% consists of in terms of size and scope

  8. James says:

    I live in a new build block of flats in central London completed in 2016 and we have an exchange only line, which is obviously extremely frustrating – having somewhat unwisely assumed a new block would have the latest technology (or at least the technology of a few years ago – FTTC).

    Does anyone know how to get information out of Openreach about possible conversion of these lines to FTTC/FTTP?

  9. New_Londoner says:

    Your simplest and least disruptive option would be to convert all of the lines to FTTC by installing a cabinet in the basement. This would need cooperation by the building owner as they would need to sign a wayleave agreement.

    It helps if the building has a residents association and/or managing agent.

  10. JustAnotherFileServer says:

    The easiest and most simple way for FTTC would be a street cabinet nearby. If you are going to put something in the actual building then it would be better to go straight to FTTP

  11. TheFacts says:

    Providing there are no issues doing the wiring to each apartment.

  12. Mike says:

    @JustAnotherFileServer I would love to continue your game of insults, but ultimately it would be a waste of time. Nobody, not even me could insult you more than the perfect job Mother Nature already did.

  13. JustAnotherFileServer says:

    @Mike You say that you won’t say anymore insults, then you continue with more insults.

  14. New_Londoner says:

    FTTP has its advantages but it can be a lot more disruptive to install in apartment buildings. That is why some landlords are not interested in putting it in. The kit for FTTC can all go in a rack in the basement, with no other work required in the building and so is much quicker to install.

  15. JustAnotherFileServer says:

    @New_Londoner I agree there would be less physical work to be done with FTTC, but way more legal work and working out who is responsible for what, even just sorting out the electrical supply for the FTTC can be a nightmare for apartment buildings (both sorting out the bureaucracy and physical work)

  16. Fastman says:

    file not sure how informed you are on FTTC internal cabinets but power require is very simple that would be significantly cheaper that trying to deploy additional Street furniture and complex network rearrangement in London wehre space is at a premium and so really at a complete loss to see now you can imagine that and external FTTC could be less work than internal cab in the basement

  17. Fastman says:

    file — yes I have experience of both before you ask

  18. JustAnotherFileServer says:

    @Fastman I’ve only had experience with FTTP installations in apartments because that’s what the clients have gone for because of long term costs (future upgrade costs. Though I’m doing some work tomorrow in an apartment building that already has FTTC installed.

  19. Mike says:

    @JustAnotherFileServer I am not trying to continue to insult you. I have no desire to add to your many problems. I recognise the importance that you must have the last word in this matter, so maybe ill let your next response be just that and you can go back to having nobody to talk with but yourself. I trust back to loneliness will make you feel like a winner.

  20. JustAnotherFileServer says:

    @Mike I hope you will feel better soon

  21. karl says:

    You got 99 problems and they’re all mental ones. I think that is how the song goes.

  22. TheFacts says:

    Mods – please delete inappropriate stuff.

Comments are closed.

Comments RSS Feed

Javascript must be enabled to post (most browsers do this automatically)

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.
Cheapest Ultrafast ISPs
  • Gigaclear £17.00 (*47.00)
    Speed: 200Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Community Fibre £20.00 (*31.50)
    Speed: 150Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Vodafone £23.00 (*26.00)
    Speed: 100Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Hyperoptic £25.00 (*35.00)
    Speed: 150Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Virgin Media £26.00 (*44.00)
    Speed: 108Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • Vodafone £19.00 (*22.00)
    Speed 38Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • NOW £20.00 (*32.00)
    Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Hyperoptic £20.00 (*25.00)
    Speed 50Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Plusnet £21.95 (*38.20)
    Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: £70 Reward Card
  • EE £22.00 (*30.00)
    Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (3757)
  2. BT (3071)
  3. Politics (2001)
  4. Building Digital UK (1960)
  5. FTTC (1903)
  6. Openreach (1884)
  7. Business (1736)
  8. Mobile Broadband (1521)
  9. Statistics (1443)
  10. FTTH (1367)
  11. 4G (1312)
  12. Virgin Media (1218)
  13. Fibre Optic (1191)
  14. Wireless Internet (1190)
  15. Ofcom Regulation (1180)
  16. Vodafone (879)
  17. EE (863)
  18. 5G (811)
  19. TalkTalk (795)
  20. Sky Broadband (766)
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms , Privacy and Cookie Policy , Links , Website Rules , Contact