Home
 » ISP News » 
Sponsored

BDUK Project – UK Superfast Broadband Take-up to H2 2019

Tuesday, May 19th, 2020 (8:35 am) - Score 2,735
uk map england scotland wales northern ireland

The Government’s £1.8bn Building Digital UK scheme has now helped to extend “superfast broadband” (24Mbps+) ISP networks to 5,230,474 extra premises since 2012 (up by 32,038 over the past 6 months) – about 370,000 of these are FTTP – and the latest take-up data to Dec 2019 shows rising demand, averaging 62% (Phase 1).

Before we get started it’s important to point out that ISPreview have now adopted a biannual approach to summarising the BDUK figures (reported for December and June), which is because the programme has reached a high level of maturity and as such regular quarterly updates seem a bit pointless (i.e. change is more visible over a 6 month window).

Otherwise the following figures reflect the percentage % of premises (homes and businesses) that have chosen to take a 24Mbps+ capable service (usually via FTTC, FTTP or Fixed Wireless Access technology), albeit specifically those which have been delivered via state aid support under the BDUK programme (i.e. % subscribed of premises passed).

The data is split between the first two phases of the programme. The most recent contracts have tended to focus on remote rural areas, which since around 2018 have increasingly involved deployments of “full fibre” (FTTP) broadband networks to reflect the Government’s changing focus toward “gigabit-capable” services.

We should add that older BDUK contracts defined “superfast” as offering download speeds of 24Mbps+, while recent ones have increased this to 30Mbps+ (aligns with the definition used by Ofcom and the EU).

BDUK Phases One (Finished Spring 2016)
Supported by £530m of public money via the Government (mostly extracted from a small slice of the BBC TV Licence fee), as well as significant match funding from local authorities and the EU. The public funding is then roughly matched by BT’s private investment. Overall it helped to extend “superfast broadband” (24Mbps+) services to cover 90% of premises in the United Kingdom.

BDUK Phase Two (Technically on-going)
Supported by £250m of public money via the Government, as well as match funding from local authorities, Local Growth Deals and private investment from suppliers (e.g. BT, Gigaclear, Airband, Call Flow etc.). This phase extended superfast broadband services to 95% of premises in time for the end of 2017, but some newer contracts are on-going (e.g. the Welsh Government’s new programme).

Most of these contracts also include a clawback (gainshare) clause, which requires the suppliers to return part of the public investment as customer adoption of the new service rises. The funding from this is being reinvested to further improve network coverage and speeds via extension contracts. Efficiency savings from earlier contracts can also be reinvested, but sadly we don’t have any recent data on that (we think it could be worth c.£300m).

So far it looks as if a total of around £788m could in theory be returned via clawback from BT (here), which may rise again in the future as contracts complete. BDUK has previously estimated that this reinvestment might be enough to help boost the UK coverage of 24Mbps+ capable networks to around or even beyond 97% (we’re at about that level now), but this is NOT an official target.

bduk impact march 2019

The Universal Service Obligation (USO) mentioned above is a reference to the Government’s new legally-binding pledge to ensure that those in the final c.2-3% of premises, which may not benefit from BDUK’s effort, can still request a download speed of at least 10Mbps (details here). Sadly Ofcom’s move to accept 4G as a solution for most of this gap feels like a bit of damp squib due to the technology’s variable nature.

BDUK Phase One Take-up (Average %)

The following tables break the take-up data down by each BDUK local authority (project area) and devolved region (Scotland, Wales etc.), although for the proper context these percentages should ideally be considered alongside the most recent premises passed (network coverage) data, which can be seen at the bottom of this article. Overall 62.66% of premises have adopted the new service (up from 59.58% in June 2019).

NOTE: Some of the counties have divided their deployments into separate contracts. For example, Phase One in Shropshire doesn’t include the ‘Telford and Wrekin‘ area because that is part of a separate Phase Two contract inside the same county. On top of that the contracts were all signed at different times and so are at different stages of development.

Project Area (BDUK Phase 1) Uptake % (H1 – Jun 2019) Uptake % (H2 – Dec 2019)
Berkshire Councils 65.5 68.61
Buckinghamshire and Hertfordshire 68.9 72.11
Cambridgeshire, Peterborough 62.9 65.54
Central Beds, Bedford Borough, Milton Keynes 68.6 70.91
Cheshire East, Cheshire West & Chester, Warrington, Halton 65.5 68.31
Devon & Somerset (including, Plymouth, Torbay, North Somerset, Bath & NE Somerset) 60 63.61
Coventry, Solihull, Warwickshire 67.7 70.27
Cumbria 60.6 64.48
Derbyshire 58.9 62.85
Dorset, Bournemouth and Poole 60 63.85
Durham, Gateshead, Tees Valley and Sunderland 58.9 63.01
East Riding of Yorkshire 63.2 66.6
East Sussex, Brighton and Hove 65.4 68.81
Essex, Southend-On-Sea, Thurrock 64.8 68.5
Greater Manchester 55.1 60.22
Hampshire 62.6 66.08
Herefordshire and Gloucestershire 59.7 63.13
Isle of Wight 58.1 61.73
Kent and Medway 63.2 66.99
Lancashire, Blackpool, Blackburn with Darwen 56.8 60.89
Leicestershire 63.8 67.33
Lincolnshire 63 66.44
Merseyside  53 57.74
Newcastle upon Tyne  55 59.5
Norfolk 62.8 66.78
North Lincolnshire, North East Lincolnshire 61.2 65.44
North Yorkshire 58.2 58.21
Northamptonshire 66.8 69.5
Northumberland 63.7 65.82
Nottinghamshire 62.2 65.9
Oxfordshire 66.6 68.43
Rutland 67 69.86
Shropshire 61.3 64.84
Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent 59.8 63.62
Suffolk 64.4 67.59
Surrey 66.6 70.02
West Sussex 66.7 68.92
West Yorkshire 57.8 62.11
Wiltshire 64.8 67.79
South Gloucestershire 66.5 68.93
Worcestershire 65.8 68.77
     
Devolved Administrations    
Highlands and Islands 60.1 63.85
Northern Ireland 67.7 69.2
Rest of Scotland 55.2 59.8
Wales 51.8 51.77

BDUK Phase Two Take-up (Average %)

So far in this phase an overall total of 48.54% of premises have adopted the new service (up from 44.02% in June 2019), although some projects have yet to report. We note that a number of Phase 2 schemes also consist of more than one contract and so you may see several figures being reported for certain areas in order to reflect each of those deals (this is sadly very confusing but that’s just how they do it).

Both of the recent contracts in Scotland and Wales will also be covered in this table because they have received some funding from the original BDUK programme. The Welsh programme (mostly FTTP) only recently started deployment and has just reported its first extremely early take-up figure of nearly 3%, which is good considering they’ve only just begun.

Project Area (BDUK Phase 2) Uptake % (H1 – Jun 2019) Uptake % (H2 – Dec 2019)
Berkshire 26, 3.7, 27.4 27.66, 5.62, 35.01, 2.17
Black Country 44.2 51.74
Bucks & Herts 47.2 52.06
Bedfordshire & Milton Keynes 48.2 56.27
Cambridgeshire no data no data
Cheshire 51.9 58.31
Cornwall 51.1, 24.1 55.88, 34.07
Cumbria 44.3 49.32
Derbyshire 40.5 40.66
Devon & Somerset 10.1, 5, 26 10.13, 9.85
Dorset 57.1, 8.4 62.64, 16.05
Durham 46.1 53.51
East Riding (Yorkshire) 55.1 60.7
East Sussex 54.1 61.95, 7.42
Essex 48.2, 26.6, 2, 13.9, 0.3 56.03, 26.61, 5.82, 21.68, 1.9, 13.37, 3.91, 2.28
Greater Manchester no data no data
Hampshire 45.7 51.38
Herefordshire & Gloucestershire 37.4, 6, 11, 6.7, 3.2, 16.7, 18.7 37.42, 12.04, 12.38, 8.53, 6.14, 26.14, 41.84
Hertfordshire no data no data
Kent 59.9 65.23
Lancashire 42.8 47.71
Leicestershire 45.2 52.45
Lincolnshire 44.9 50.08
Norfolk 52.4 56.33
North Lincolnshire 46.2 52.71
North Yorkshire 56.4, 14.7 56.36, 19.56
Northamptonshire 53.7, 12.9, 11.8 58.96, 11.85, 10.8
Northumberland 49.8 50.77
Nottinghamshire 47 50.42, 49.95
Oxfordshire no data 5.68
Rutland no data no data
Shropshire 47.1, 2.2 57.13, 1.58
South Gloucestershire 50.8, 23.9 58.95, 20.75
South Yorkshire 46.7 53.16, 3.08
Staffordshire 44.4 51.12
Suffolk 51.4 57.18
Swindon 9 8.68
Telford & Wrekin 59.7 64.46
Warwickshire 46.9, 6 55.49, 10.39
West Oxfordshire 8 11.64
West Sussex 52.8 58.67
West Yorkshire 42.3 48.21
Wiltshire 50.6, 0.9, 16.5 54.8, 7.54, 21.52
Worcestershire 53.9 55.43, 20.13
     
Devolved Administrations    
Highlands and Islands no data no data
Northern Ireland 46.2 50.77
Rest of Scotland no data no data
Wales no data 2.73, 2.58, 2.59

IMPORTANT: Take-up is a dynamically scaled measurement, which means that at certain stages of the scheme it may go up or even down depending upon the pace of deployment (i.e. premises passed in any given time-scale), although over time the take-up should only rise.

Explained another way, earlier phases of the roll-out were easier and faster to deploy, so you could expect to see a bit of a yo-yo movement with the take-up % sometimes falling if lots of new areas were suddenly covered. Some contracts are also younger than others and will thus take time to catch-up. On top of that BDUK’s roll-out pace has slowed to a crawl as it reaches remote rural areas, which will give take-up a chance to climb.

NOTE: It’s often best to judge take-up by looking at areas that completed their deployments around 1-2 years ago. A lot of FTTP operators target 20-25%.

A number of other factors can also impact take-up, such as the higher prices for related “fibre” services, as well as customers being locked into long contracts with their existing ISP (they can’t upgrade immediately) and a lack of general awareness (locals don’t always know that the faster service exists) or interest in the new connectivity (if you have a decent ADSL2+ speed and only basic needs then you might feel less inclined to upgrade).

The fear of switching to a different ISP may also obstruct some services. In other cases the new service may run out of capacity (i.e. demand is higher than expected), which means that people who want to upgrade are prevented from doing so until Openreach resolves the problem, although the scale of this issue is fairly small.

Now, for some context, here’s the latest progress report on related contracts for the same period (this doesn’t show any match-funding from private investment).

Funding and Premises Passed Progress (BDUK Phase 1 + 2)

  Total BDUK Contracted Funding Total LB Contracted Funding Current Total Contracted Premises Delivered to Date (Dec 2019)
Bedford & Milton Keynes £8,130,000 £9,443,694 52,530 50,935
Berkshire £5,153,017 £4,603,250 40,907 32,296
Black Country £2,988,349 £2,988,349 37,302 37,389
Bucks & Herts £10,837,000 £11,415,000 93,695 89,646
Cambridgeshire £8,250,000 £21,895,592 111,901 105,248
Cheshire £6,461,000 £16,091,055 82,039 82,210
Cornwall £5,960,000 £13,728,108 14,988 13,564
Cumbria £19,959,519 £18,798,000 121,780 121,298
Derbyshire £9,579,550 £9,580,000 103,737 98,453
Devon & Somerset £40,029,305 £30,317,110 298,251 294,871
Dorset £13,741,841 £16,051,546 79,466 78,054
Durham £13,189,267 £12,166,000 116,744 111,656
East Riding (Yorkshire) £10,507,459 £8,393,079 51,661 49,753
East Sussex £13,640,000 £13,000,000 70,015 63,936
Essex £14,254,755 £19,296,658 158,848 135,359
Greater Manchester £3,440,000 £5,923,000 41,363 40,062
Hampshire £15,262,307 £14,261,230 110,498 100,764
Herefordshire & Gloucestershire £31,090,658 £34,512,090 161,428 132,462
Hertfordshire £0 £879,471 546 0
Highlands & Islands £50,830,000 £75,600,000 150,997 150,567
Isle of Wight £2,490,000 £2,490,000 17,617 17,649
Kent £17,063,509 £14,998,391 144,131 138,401
Lancashire £14,670,000 £22,540,000 147,334 145,432
Leicestershire £7,968,895 £10,884,318 75,149 72,760
Lincolnshire £16,110,000 £17,910,000 135,710 135,032
Merseyside £5,460,000 £4,374,000 43,905 43,966
Newcastle £970,000 £941,158 6,760 6,697
Norfolk £24,650,000 £26,153,767 213,716 200,203
North Lincolnshire £4,181,242 £1,880,963 29,292 29,344
North Yorkshire £28,160,000 £25,804,726 175,283 170,052
Northamptonshire £9,856,669 £11,009,000 79,349 75,532
Northern Ireland £11,454,000 £21,954,000 66,907 67,173
Northumberland £10,687,867 £12,016,750 49,620 49,097
Nottinghamshire £7,850,000 £9,288,644 67,387 67,525
Oxfordshire £8,184,500 £20,045,470 79,103 78,249
Rest of Scotland £50,000,000 £107,575,000 581,999 586,607
Rutland £1,000,000 £1,670,000 7,066 9,835
Shropshire £19,317,466 £12,722,000 69,697 67,147
South Gloucestershire £3,370,000 £3,521,123 19,802 19,645
South Yorkshire £10,395,000 £13,353,577 102,887 96,931
Staffordshire £9,620,000 £7,543,413 80,567 80,704
Suffolk £26,940,000 £27,769,703 131,832 123,689
Surrey £1,310,000 £19,020,081 79,407 78,616
Swindon £950,000 £950,000 20,159 17,010
Telford & Wrekin £2,157,000 £1,843,000 8,822 8,698
Wales £69,040,000 £180,651,507 754,921 703,951
Warwickshire £14,557,172 £14,557,172 73,940 62,148
West Oxfordshire £1,600,000 £1,556,675 4,788 2,961
West Sussex £8,011,243 £7,510,000 53,771 53,617
West Yorkshire £11,019,827 £11,175,487 100,368 96,853
Wiltshire £9,270,000 £16,496,000 81,636 75,988
Worcestershire £8,387,032 £11,403,641 63,043 60,439
  £700,005,449 £980,552,798 5,464,664 5,230,474

The above figures only include 24Mbps+ capable premises in BDUK intervention areas.

Share with Twitter
Share with Linkedin
Share with Facebook
Share with Reddit
Share with Pinterest
Mark Jackson
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
25 Responses
  1. Avatar NGA for all says:

    The only question given the funds within the process and contracted not delivered, is why not finish the job? There are ~800k premises to go of which half are either contracted or about to be contracted with Stratum, R100, and some in Wales reducing this number.

    There is still no evidence of the status of BT’s matched funding to the allowable costs for each project. Lots of opex and overheads no doubt, but nothing on the contractual and state aid requirement to pay a proportion of the direct costs in a gap funding model.

    I also believe your under reporting the FTTP rural. Think Broadband ascribed more than ~500k to BDUK recently to which 85k can be added for Cornwall.

    The efficiencies and savings are the same as the inflated costs reported by the NAO in 2015. They found the 2012 BT Group cost models had been inflated by 38%, which is close to the amount of direct capital contribution ought to be making, so there is perhaps more possible.

    It will be hugely successful if the job is completed and reported on more fully. This would permit rather numbers of rural exchanges to be near ready for the transition to full fibre. 40 of the 180 exchanges announced are Tier1.

    1. Mark Jackson Mark Jackson says:

      “I also believe your under reporting the FTTP rural. Think Broadband ascribed more than ~500k to BDUK recently to which 85k can be added for Cornwall.”

      The 370,000 figure is not ours, it’s the official one that the Government published as part of their Budget 2020 announcement (as per the article link). The original BT/EU Cornwall project was of course not BDUK.

    2. Avatar NGA for all says:

      The 370k is out of date, but Cornwall is state aid, and while the contractual model is not exactly the same there are similarities.

      Why can the work not be concluded, especially given the £5bn election money is likely to dis-appear due to the impact of Covid-19?

    3. Avatar Andrew Ferguson says:

      The tbb figure quoted will include Cornwall already.

      There is a reason it carries the bduk/gap funded or other rural intervention label.

    4. Avatar NGA for all says:

      @AF Thanks for the clarification.

    5. Mark Jackson Mark Jackson says:

      I highly doubt that the Government will abandon their £5bn commitment, but we’ll have to see. Usually infrastructure spending takes priority during heavy recessions and investment in broadband is well understood for its tangible returns.

    6. Avatar NGA for all says:

      The incremental benefit of getting to 24Mbps-30Mbps is understood using full fibre where needed to do so, or delivering a shared data transport infrastructure with a peak per user of 1-2Mbps. The incremental benefit of all fibre is better expressed in the cost savings to the operator.
      The additional benefits to SMEs is removing the discretion to mis-sell private or partial private circuits, hence the importance of being able to make a reasonable request.
      IMHO both election promises were whims where the £5bn and its 2025 timescale was just less stupid than the Labour alternative. We will find out soon, but the funds within the BDUK process are likely to be the only chance in this generation to complete the rural work started in 2012.

    7. Avatar The Facts says:

      @NGA – What’s ‘a reasonable request’

    8. Avatar NGA for all says:

      @Facts In WLA 2017 Ofcom while stating BT was obliged to respond to a ‘reasonable request’ for a full or partial fibre service, Ofcom did not go to the trouble of defining it. The work is still outstanding.

      It is likely to follow the PSTN access lines should Ofcom get out of bed on the matter.

    9. Avatar The Facts says:

      @NGA – And I guess will never be defined as there are now a number of suppliers who can supply services. Also fibre is a method of delivery not the specification for a requirement. And there would be of the issue of at what cost.

    10. Avatar NGA for all says:

      @Facts Disagree. It should not be too difficult to outline for instance if connectorised block is installed on a pole then x happens, if a splitter is with x metres y happens, if a spare fibre is available adjacent to subsidised can then other conditions apply. Ofcom had not got as far as differentiating between handover points and exchanges in 2017.

      It continues to be more a resource issue. BT committed to fibre on demand in 2014 everywhere, in all exchanges and then defined it as if they were delivering a private circuit in order to kick the can down the road.

  2. Avatar AnotherTim says:

    The premises passed figures show how little progress is actually being made – for Herefordshire & Gloucestershire the premises passed has gone up by just under 8000 since the Q4 2018 figures over a year ago. The scope has increased by just over 9000 premises, so they have more remaining to build than they had a year ago. With 31000 premises still in plan it will take another 4 years (and as the build seems to be getting slower and slower, probably much longer).

    1. Avatar NGA for all says:

      Yet the funds are there to complete the works. Very frustrating.

    2. Mark Jackson Mark Jackson says:

      Remember there will be time lags before new contracts are agreed and build on those can begin, as well as ramp-up and ramp-down periods. Likewise the roll-out pace, particularly when using FTTP in remote rural areas (this is where that remaining BDUK is focused), is considerably slower by virtue of the environment and sparse population density. No surprise that it’s a slow expensive slog, that is just reality with full fibre.

    3. Avatar AnotherTim says:

      There are definitely time-lags – Gigaclear won their Fastershire contracts over 3 years ago, and yet my area still doesn’t even have a rollout plan (they have rewritten the plan several times, but don’t make it visible to the public, then a few months later they scrap it and start planning again). Fastershire still claim the build in my area will start in Q1 2020, but it took them months to admit that the completion date of Q4 2018 wasn’t possible.

    4. Avatar NGA for all says:

      The costs of ramping up and down is a function of the gaming of cost and capital. This led to the greater separation of Openreach from BT Group. You would not need to ramp up and down as much if there were trusted relationships and more transparency.

      It is good to see Openreach engineers speak out in other forums on the imbecility of BT Group managers (telecoms now), some now in Openreach effectively slowing progress in order to optimise cash flow in the short term at the expense of the engineering with no long term gain for customers or shareholders. Herefordshire is a good example, but it is good to see Burleygate, Harewood End, and Canon Pyon on the full fibre transition list.

    5. Mark Jackson Mark Jackson says:

      Gigaclear’s problem is that they promised a highly optimistic time-scale when agreeing their contracts and then failed to correctly plan, manage and resource for it all. The new owners have done a better job but of course people are still having to suffer massive delays. No easy fix for that.

      CDS obviously took the nuclear option with their contract – scrapped it and went hunting for another supplier.. for something like the 3rd time in a row. I suspect, after all is said and done, they may end up back with BT again – tails between legs etc.

    6. Avatar joe says:

      If CDS has gone with BT all the way though from the first contracts they’d have been done long ago.

  3. Avatar Bored Panda says:

    How can someone say “superfast” and 24mbit and keep a straight face.

    1. Mark Jackson Mark Jackson says:

      Ask the Government and Ofcom, these are their definitions. Hence why I always stick them in speech-marks 🙂 . Same with “ultrafast”. But at least with the latest “gigabit-capable” slogan there’s actually some reflection of the expected performance in the wording.

    2. Avatar The 'Real' Facts says:

      Or the 4 Mbit I get from my ‘fibre’ broadband?
      Or the 10 Mbit Universal Service Obligation where I am getting sold 4G.
      I bought 4G. Given how bad the ADSL, it could not be worse could it?
      The 4G is also sh!t averaging around 2 Mbit with high latency, and never close to 10Mbit.

  4. Avatar Aimee says:

    Thre is a written question and answer
    Department for Digital, Culture, Media and SportBroadband: Standards43205
    To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, how many properties receive broadband with speeds less than 30Mbps in (a) High Peak constituency, (b) Derbyshire and (c) the UK.
    on the parliament web site
    https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-questions-answers/?page=1&max=20&questiontype=AllQuestions&house=commons%2Clords&member=4852
    with links to data.

  5. Avatar Graham Long says:

    This article misleadingly describes BDUK Phase 2 as “technically ongoing”. Tell that to residents in 83% of rural Devon & Somerset where thanks to the incompetence of Connecting Devon & Somerset, CDS will not have a contractor in place until the beginning of 2021 and some people/properties who have now waited 8 years since CDS Phase 2 was funded by BDUK may not get better broadband until 2025. CDS have failed three times to put contracts in place for five sixths (83%) of rural Devon & Somerset and three times they have failed to achieve that. To make a mistake the first time is a learning experience. To make the same mistake a second time is an error. To make the same mistake a third time is incompetence and CDS HAVE NOW DEMONSTRATED THEIR INCOMPETENCE AND THE WHOLE PROJECTED NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OUT OF THEIR HANDS AND THE HANDS OF THE TWO FAILED COUNTY COUNCILS.

    1. Mark Jackson Mark Jackson says:

      I may be missing something but that only reinforces the “technically on-going” statement because it is indeed on-going, even in CDS land, and beyond the original UK coverage target of 95%. In other areas clawback reinvestment through the BDUK framework is being used to extend coverage more successfully.

      Meanwhile Scotland and Wales have used some BDUK Phase 2 funding in their recent contracts. The UK is much larger than just Devon and Somerset, Graham.

    2. Avatar joe says:

      Just cus you live in Dorset Mark 😉

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

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 Superfast ISPs
  • Vodafone £22.00
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Hyperoptic £22.00
    Avg. Speed 50Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Onestream £22.49 (*29.99)
    Avg. Speed 45Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • xln telecom £22.74 (*47.94)
    Avg. Speed 66Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Plusnet £22.99 (*36.52)
    Avg. Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: £55 Reward Card
Prices inc. Line Rental | View All
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (2808)
  2. BT (2789)
  3. FTTC (1790)
  4. Building Digital UK (1758)
  5. Politics (1687)
  6. Openreach (1640)
  7. Business (1454)
  8. FTTH (1341)
  9. Statistics (1249)
  10. Mobile Broadband (1245)
  11. 4G (1074)
  12. Fibre Optic (1071)
  13. Wireless Internet (1032)
  14. Ofcom Regulation (1028)
  15. Virgin Media (1014)
  16. EE (707)
  17. Vodafone (676)
  18. Sky Broadband (672)
  19. TalkTalk (669)
  20. 5G (531)
New Forum Topics
»
»
FTTP
Author: handsomeinked
»
B311 antenna help
Author: cxsmc91
»
Huawei B818-263
Author: teleman6868
»
Promotion
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
Sponsored

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