» ISP News, Key Developments » 

Openreach UK Raise Copper Line Prices to Fuel Full Fibre Rollout

Wednesday, March 31st, 2021 (1:49 pm) - Score 18,072

As expected (or feared) Openreach (BT) has today announced a series of wholesale price increases for UK ISPs that use certain legacy copper line broadband, FTTC (VDSL2, G.fast, SOGEA) and phone products, which are intended to help the operator to afford their £12bn roll-out of 1Gbps Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) technology.

The move follows the recent publication of Ofcom’s Wholesale Fixed Telecoms Market Review 2021-26 (summary), which among other changes saw the regulator move away from cost-based charge controls on copper line services. As part of that Openreach also gained the ability to spread the cost of investment in FTTP across a wider group of consumers (e.g. allowing them to recover some investment costs from both copper and fibre products).

NOTE: Openreach’s ambition is to cover 20 million premises with FTTP by the mid to late 2020s (2025-30), which is expected to attract a total cost of £12bn (here). So far they’ve already done 4.5 million.

Ofcom’s decision was inevitably going to result in some price increases at the wholesale level, which seemed likely to hit those ISPs that have invested the most into unbundling (LLU) the copper network (e.g. TalkTalk and Sky Broadband). Naturally, any extra costs that hit ISPs will ultimately end up being passed on to consumers and so it has now come to pass.

A quick glance across Openreach’s price notification page today shows a plethora of small increases across multiple products. For example, the annual rental on various FTTC speeds has gone up by between £0.48 to £1.68 (+vat) and it’s a similar story for installation services, migrations and various other products etc. Most of these increases are due to be introduced from 1st July 2021.

The connection cost of a 10Gbps GEA Cablelink (capacity supply) will also rise from £1042.00 to £1051.71. More of the same may occur in future years. But it’s not all bad news as they’ve also reduced some prices for alternative network (AltNet) providers that harness existing cable ducts and poles to run their own fibre (PIA).

James Lilley, Openreach’s Director of Managed Customer Migrations, said:

“It’s our ambition to reinforce the UK’s position as a global leader for digital infrastructure. That’s why we’ve been preparing to withdraw our ageing copper network and to simplify and focus on providing modern digital connections including our new full fibre platform.”

With the WFTMR giving us the certainty over pricing across our portfolio, we in turn can offer long term stability and choice for our customers. These price changes are a natural shift, and as a heavily regulated business the WFTMR has enabled us to make some modest price increases on certain legacy products to reflect the increasing cost of network maintenance and to encourage customers onto modern, digital alternatives.

At the same time, we’ve also implemented price reductions on some of our physical infrastructure access products and we believe that these changes will encourage alternative networks to use our network to help them build and ultimately enable more of the UK’s homes and businesses to experience the benefits of faster and more reliable broadband.

We know that upgrading people onto future-proofed full fibre broadband will keep the UK at the forefront of the global digital economy – boosting productivity, growth and prosperity. We want the UK to start reaping those benefits now, so we’re encouraging providers, homes and businesses to make the switch to FTTP wherever it’s available and sooner rather than later.”

Openreach have been careful to make such increases fairly small and gradual, so as not to introduce too much of an aggressive hit that might cause significant upset among UK ISPs and consumers alike. The operator is ultimately only doing what Ofcom has allowed them to do and the regulator remains adamant that Openreach deserves the chance to make a “fair return” on that huge FTTP investment.

At the same time Openreach has to be careful about how they handle this because price increases could encourage consumers in some areas to move away to rival FTTP platforms, where available, which could be counter-productive to their goals. Finally, we should add that some FTTP linked product prices have also increased.

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
75 Responses
  1. Dave says:

    Am I reading this right then? Those of us in the country with little to no hope of every seeing FTTP are going to be paying more (once the ISP passes on the cost) when in fact we pay more now for slower speeds and less choice of supplier due to no LLU in our exchanges, than someone in urban who does and is likely to get FTTP at some point in the future?

    I appreciate they are a business but hitting copper users, for which there are thousands if not more is a bitter pill to swallow, seems they want to milk all they can whilst they can of a legacy service.

    1. Barney says:

      Look at who is in charge of this country. What more could you expect? If it doesn’t suit them, no chance.

      I will be looking into starting up a rural community fibre programme when they are announced on 8th April and will be trying very hard to see if we can use anyone other than Openreach for it.

    2. joe says:

      No milking it. rural provision is expensive and x-subsidised by the rotUK. many of those on copper can switch and this will drive this faster and part pay for the eventual fttp to almost all.

    3. Buggerlugz says:

      Yes, beat me too it. If you get “pretend” fibre (FTTC), then you get slower speeds but have to pay more than someone who gets FTP.

      It beggars belief how utterly lacking in vision and service provision the people running BT are.

    4. M says:

      Although I don’t like the idea, keep an eye on Starlink. It’ll be a half decent option for places like yours, hopefully the cost will come down and you can forget all about British ISP’s and BT for ever more, so long as you can get a mobile signal for your phone or WiFi calling.

    5. Fastman says:

      Barney thats your choice to use whoever you choose

      i assume you will be upfront with your community as to why you have made that decision then

      as an aside who do think pays for the commercial roll out of the network and where do you think the >5bn (might be closer to 6 or more Openreach has spent on Fibre the UK since its commercial programme started

    6. Barney says:

      Fastman – will most deffo be upfront. With other providers out there with a 1:1 upload/download ratio why would you pick a provider like openreach who offer 330/50?

    7. Barney says:

      “as an aside who do think pays for the commercial roll out of the network and where do you think the >5bn (might be closer to 6 or more Openreach has spent on Fibre the UK since its commercial programme started”

      I would guess WE PAY as taxpayers and as Openreach customers for the roll out of the commercial roll out through central government and local government subsidies and grants. Let’s not forget the business customers who are paying through the nose for getting fibre provision but being held up and charged extra because of a lack of long term maintenance in their infrastructure.

    8. Fraser Munro says:

      How about us on aluminium lines?

    9. CarlT says:

      No. Even ignoring the regular point about everyone paying the same for a number of products whatever the cost of provisioning FTTP went up in price too.

  2. Granola says:

    It does seem rich making people who can’t get FTTP paying extra so the lucky ones who can get it pay less for the privilege.

    1. Archie says:

      It’s definitely a Seymour Skinner move lol

      “…No, it’s the children who are wrong”.

    2. CarlT says:

      1) FTTP went up too.
      2) The increases are to build out the FTTP network and bring it to more people, not for the benefit of those already able to receive it. Everyone is paying more to widen availability.

  3. Raging Bull says:

    The reality of the situation is the cost of rolling out FTTP nationwide, its expensive and needs to be paid for.

    For those moaning they can’t get FTTP or even FTTC, do you know how much extra it costs to maintain copper infrastructure on long lines or to rural locations?

    All you see is a set price covered by your chosen ISP, there are additional costs to provide that which is born by the rest of the country using OR infrastructure.

    If you live in a rural location, it costs more to provide that service, simple economic fact. If you want to benefit from faster speeds, move somewhere less pretty in the middle of a large town or city. No one is holding you hostage, you make the decision that benefits you most and that comes with associated costs.

    I have no sympathy for those living in pretty areas of the country, we’re already paying via services from OR or Taxes to the Government to get you the services you already have.

    If you want faster broadband then be prepared to cough up.

    1. Buggerlugz says:

      The problem with this though, is the people with FTTC will most probably NEVER get FTTH, so why should they pay more?

    2. AnotherTim says:

      But they aren’t actually withdrawing the copper network for most people (not in the next few decades anyway). They are withdrawing PSTN, but most people will then have to rely on copper to provide the broadband for VoIP. So this is really just a price increase.

    3. Buggerlugz says:

      I just feel for the folks stuck on pathetic FTTC (due to the last 50 yards of 60 year old twisted pair providing them a crap broadband experience) now paying for other folks FTTH that they’ll never see.

      Which is another reason to use 4g rather than BT. Because its generally better than FTTC. Wonder if BT are aware of this?

    4. AnotherTim says:

      Pathetic FTTC? My only fixed line choice is ADSL2+ (at least we did get the upgrade from ADSL Max 3 years ago).
      I use 4G instead of ADSL, but BT won’t care as I use EE.

    5. John h says:

      It’s costs way more to look after a decaying copper network than a fibre one, I dropped my weather dependant copper adsl for 4G, 5 times the speed and a I use 2 4G routers I have redundancy if one mast goes down. All for the same price

    6. M says:

      No sorry, it’s just a price increase to pad out share holders pockets, the moaning is perfectly justified by those stuck for ever more on FTTC.
      Thankfully Starlink hopefully will become cheaper and you can get that and tell BT where to go, vote with your wallet. Remove that small funding to enable privileged folks like you to have FTTP.

    7. Anna says:

      Feel for me!

      5M line too long to get g.fast others get 200mbps I am stuck on 27!

    8. Anna says:

      @Tim Sky just put in a new physical line for me.. so hmmm.

    9. NorthernNoel says:

      Irony is that I live in a city. However the run to cabinet means that I get 12mb down and 1mb up. Been an interesting year trying to survive on that working from home and home schooling. Next door however get decent speeds as they’re on a different cabinet. There’s no plans to upgrade the area to FTTP either.

    10. Cris Page says:

      Yeah pretty areas, like ours with 2 lng plants that provide 35% of the lng that heats homes across the uk, while the trunk pipeline that carries gas to your urban areas carves thru villages that have no mains gas supply. Oh and not forgetting the gas power station or the several solar farms that provide power for your networks, additionally right now 3 miles from me they are developing wave generation to add to it, and then there’s the huge oil refinery that provides the fuel and petroleum products to keep UK PLC ticking over, I could also add the 2 Irish ferry ports that are the reason we sit on a road designated as a European Trunk Route. This area also produces foodstuffs and milk… all important to the economy.

      I get so sick of the tired old fallacy that rural areas are idyllic hamlets, this county punches above its weight in terms of the economy, and it isn’t the only one. Some urban dwellers need to update thier perceptions, and for the record.. I’m a Londoner by birth.

    11. Hexinjack says:

      “For those moaning they can’t get FTTP or even FTTC, do you know how much extra it costs to maintain copper infrastructure on long lines or to rural locations?”

      @Raging Bull – This is very valid. I work for an ISP and we’ve decided to keep some copper customers to save the media backlash if we were to cease their services and release them, when we’re actually making a loss on a bunch of services (even if they don’t have any faults, we lose on the wholesale and equipment costs). We even floated the idea of passing them to one of our partners, but they didn’t want them! Ultimately our other customers are paying the money to cover the cost of these services. We’re just waiting for them to leave and then won’t resell to them if they try to come back at a later date, unless Openreach have upgraded the infrastructure already.

    12. Richard says:

      OR are a commercial entity and can get money through stock options and/or loans, just like the alt-nets have had to. They should not be able to abuse their near monopoly position to get their customers to pay for the rollout of FTTP which they need to do anyway to keep their position in the market.

      People living in rural areas are probably a drop in the ocean costs wise and easily spread over the rest of the user base allowing for anyone to move and live anywhere and still get service. Given that OR don’t plan on rolling out FTTP anyway to the most remote 5% of the country your vitriol seems to be misplaced.

    13. 125us says:

      Remember that the slow initial rollout of FTTP by Openreach and other providers was partly because Ofcom price controls on copper broadband were so low that no-one could make the sums add up to build fibre. It was cheaper for CPs to rent copper than it was for them to build out.

      To change the economics of that copper has to increase in price. It’s hard to convince investors to cough up when the shiny new thing you want to build has to compete in the market against a rival product with an artificially low price.

    14. Fastman says:


      so you think that you other vendors will be offering unlimited – best better check the back haul then and what there purchasing before you end up looking with egg on face — i knew of one company that was advertising 1g services to all and sundry and he only had a 10g backhaul back to the point of presence 50 miels away from where was trying to sell to a village

      really worries me when people all about the head line but actually dont read or understand any of bits that make up the network – and then wonder why the didnt get what they though they would

  4. Bill says:

    Love the use of “legacy” for “copper line broadband, FTTC (VDSL2, G.fast, SOGEA)”.

    Keep it coming.

  5. GNewton says:

    This is all part of a failed government policy in this backwards country, combined with incompetent telecoms like BT. This country is more than a decade behind of where it should. And by now it should be clear to everyone that private telecoms aren’t the solution for the increasing digital divide because the ROI for a large number of areas is too far in the future, beyond the capabilities of private businesses.

    An NBN-style approach is needed for at least for certain areas. And an immediate stop to giving taxpayers monies to private companies like BT who have no need for it. The BDUK FTTC farce is just one example of it.

    1. Q says:

      Couldn’t agree more. Thankfully with a bit of luck 5G and services like Starlink will go some small way to rectify it, the ideas they have come up with, the monopoly provider and government using tax payers money, stinks of utter incompetence and scratching peoples backs passing those fat wallets out further. IMO. Hardly a big country yet it’s made out to provide decent fibre services to rural areas is the same difficulty as trying to live on Mars….

    2. Fastman says:

      Gnewton same old same old same old as ever –

      no public money was ever given (from a man who i understand is a financial contollor / accountant) there seems to be a distinct lack of understanding of the world of Competitive Tendering and the principles of match funding (no BDUK contract has been given to any operator so that is disinformation of the highest order) and all contracts will have an element of matched funding, All of then will have very specific Milestones and you only got get paid on milestones one you provide you have delivered those Milestones. Other Network Operators have found thats not easy , painful and some no longer have BDUk contract because they did not or could not deliver under the terms of the contracts

      as an didnt you benefit from BDUK ?

    3. GNewton says:

      “no BDUK contract has been given to any operator”

      Well, the vast majority of BDUK tenders were won by BT which could have built the networks without additional public money anyway. The whole tendering process was a farce.

      Your zeal for BT is admirable, but the reality is different.

      The whole current framework of supporting private telecom companies was wrong, and it doesn’t solve the issue of the widening digital divide in this already backwards country.

    4. Fastman says:

      G newton

      Your zeal for commercial unreality is l;ike canute and the tide and this is the reality nt.

      state controlled telecoms does not work you all end up the same (back in the 1970s) – and if you want to pay thousand out your taxes to support a single person who lives up 6km of no duct and doesn’t have gas, water or electricity (ie untility 1,2 or 3 on mains then demands broadband as the 4th utility is nonsense

      so did you get covered by BDUK or did BDUK think you were not good value for money ?

  6. Anthony Goodman says:

    Is it just me or would the obvious solution have been the areas that have FTTP installed, raise the price of Copper internet/telephone to make them want to switch to FTTP and make the extra money from those who refuse to do so.

    1. JP says:

      So basically re-classify all exchanges where FTTP rollout is at 100% (which is probably none)

      It’s not an easy or cheap process to reclassify certain services in certain area’s, the issues this would cause for operators would be massive,

      However ISP’s already up ell services and when exchanges reach a 100% next gen level they implement stop sales on services so ISP’s cannot sell them.

    2. Fastman says:

      your suggestion would cause signifant consternation with the regulator as it is anti competive to copper only providers and would land any operator underatking this in very hot water with regulator (Openreach is not allowed to worsen copper service to force customer of r to upgrade to fibre. as those those provider might not offer fibre services today and you would be forcing customers to change provider

  7. Moronz says:

    Can’t believe how inaccurate and under qualified the comments on this site are these days. It’s akin to a bunch of old ladies getting together to have a moan.

    The only point i’ll agree on is that this country is ran by a bunch of over privileged morons who were voted into power by millions of under privileged morons. Remember when that moron from that other party suggested free broadband and everyone laughed ?

    There will be very few people in the next few years who will not have access to a pure fiber connection. The folk where it is deemed impossible or impractical due to costing to have the network provided will have to wing it , Move/5G/satellite/ build your own network ….whatever.


    1. JP says:

      “”The only point i’ll agree on is that this country is ran by a bunch of over privileged morons who were voted into power by millions of under privileged morons. Remember when that moron from that other party suggested free broadband and everyone laughed ? “”

      Show me a party that isn’t a bunch of ‘over privileged morons’, last time we saw anything close to this the country shot them down under the privileged narrative and classed them as scum, bigots and another millions hate based slurs, so now we have what we have and regardless of left, right, up or down it would and always will be the same.

      What people want to watch is what else is going on in the background that beeb don’t tell them about.

      Anyway, JP OUT!

    2. Q says:

      Instead of insulting everyone, if you don’t like the comments it’s simple, don’t read them, go over to the forum to have your moan. Moron.

  8. JP says:

    Yawn, same old fricken arguments over and over again, week after week, same unrelated bs comments.

    Always the minority that wanna spoil it for the majority.

  9. Me says:

    Copper was installed two generations ago. Paid for by investors who have recovered there said investment with profit.
    Now mushrooms don’t worry about that. We will pass on our costs of fibre to the mushrooms once again. Rinse and repeat.

  10. biden says:

    This is shocked bad news for many of us stuck on old copper FTTC with more price going up along with line rental to give openreach extra money for full fibre. Well it won’t work!

    What has happen to Boris promise of everyones in UK get gigabit full fibre? Why the government isn’t fund it?

    Failed Tory Promise.

    1. JP says:

      😛 I can get gigabit, thanks Tories, Thanks Trump, just because 😛

    2. Fastman says:

      government did not promise to provide FTTP to every one

    3. Barney says:

      Fasterman – your 2019 manifesto offered to provide “full-fibre and gigabit-capable” to every home and business.

  11. Manic says:

    Pathetic FTTC? 67M not at all shabby. Allows our family to simultaneously watch HDTV, game, Work from home, surf etc. Don’t think any higher speed (from HTTP) would be advantageous for most

    1. JP says:

      I run a house of 4 adults on 50mbps no issues, lots of streaming without problems.

      People that think they need more are just pawns to the marketing heads that want their money.

      I used to be like this, then realised it was a waste of time and money.

    2. Doc says:

      I agree. I live in a small village in rural North Wales. I am very happy with my FTTC Service and getting 76Mb down + 19Mbs up is more than enough for me to stream and game in 4k UHD. Granted, I do live alone but 24 quid per month including line rental is a great price. Not too long ago I was living further out in the sticks and getting 0.7Mbps and line rental alone was close to this price! I guess that once you’ve had it REALLY bad, one can appreciate the difference more. Full Fibre? Yes please. £100 ish prices? Naaaaa – I’ll pass on that thanks!

  12. TB says:

    The money has to come from somewhere… although the price increases will be painful for the rural users they will eventually have FTTP (or Starlink)?
    One of our local villages was upgraded recently by Openreach, the costs were estimated at £750,000 which covered just 65 properties, I’m not sure how costs like that would ever be covered by line rental!

    1. Paul M says:

      BT make these prices up, it’s b.s.
      Five months ago they quoted £590/house to lay fibre to houses in this village, which would mostly have been covered by the available grants.
      They didn’t meet the deadlines for the grants and are starting a new community fibre plan for the expected new grant scheme coming in April. Quite weirdly, the cost per house has gone up to £1500, exactly in line with the value of the new grant.

    2. TB says:

      In this case although expensive the prices quoted weren’t bs, it covered the cost of a specialised vehicle to cut 6km of road to lay duct, that also had to pay for approx 25 workers for 3 full weeks including contractors for traffic lights/road closures, a digging team, concreting team, tarmacing team (all contractors) as well as the Openreach workers who had to hand dig some of the more sensitive sections, it’s expensive work

    3. Apple says:

      Please that’s nothing considering the public money thrown at Open Reach by government, you forget that part. They make that money back ten fold.
      If broadband was a utility like telephone, they would be obliged to provide a service, just like other utilities who spend more then that to install services.

    4. Fastman says:

      Paul M they most certainly do not – so when did you get the first quote and when did you get the 2nd – are they for exactly the same amount of premises based on the same network build coming from the same network node – there are many reasons why a scheme might cost different the different number of premises , where the nearest Network node is that can be used

      fraid you are talking out of what you are sitting on

  13. Paul M says:

    I should only have to pay 60% of the line rental because my phone line can only achieve 60% of the normal maximum speed for vdsl2/2+

    If this was mandated by Ofcom, many people would pay only a pound, if that, in line rental, and bt would get their bl**dy act together about fibre deployment.

    1. Nigel Phillips says:

      On the basis of that argument a long rural line that can only achieve 5% of the maximum speeds of a FTTC service would only pay 5% of the price while possibly costing in excess of hundreds of % to maintain?

      If Ofcom mandated such a thing would you also be happy to accept that BT would be allowed to refuse service to such households due to unviable costs?

      The reason rural areas pay the same price for a slower service is down to running and maintenance costs of the network in such areas. In reality a lot of rural lines cost more to maintain than the line rental being charged and the costs are covered from rental in other areas with lower maintenance needs.

      FTTP/FTTH is the answer to this but will come at increased short term costs to everyone. BT is only one network provider and while it is the main provider in the UK there are plenty of other companies out there that can also “get there bl**dy act together” for such areas.

    2. 125us says:

      No. You’d find that no ISPs would offer you service because you would cost more to serve than the revenue they get from you.

      No ISP is obliged to offer you service.

    3. Nigel Phillips says:

      BT as a network provider is obliged to offer a service that may cost more than the revenue made off of the line.

      The USO agreement means that for certain premises they legally have to provide a line at costs which they may never recover by the time FTTP is installed.

  14. alan says:

    In our village, BT provided fibre from the exchange along the drive to a cabinet in the main road.
    Then in a blaze of Publicity “Fibre has arrived in Bures”
    90% of the distance to my house FTTC) is still copper
    So will that still be classed as Fibre ?

    1. TB says:

      As always the terminology appears to be deliberately confusing, the majority of the properties connected to this cabinet will now be ‘superfast’ capable although obviously distance from the cabinet is the key, will have to wait for full fibre before you can get any ‘ultrafast’ services

  15. Eddie Digital says:

    The UK market has a problem. We would not entertain the idea of having 2 or 3 or more water pipes, electricity cables to our properties.

    Thats what has happened in cities and some suburbs with fibre.

    This has been a major error by the UK gov as it has meant we pay for rollout twice as consumers and tax payers.

    As the city centre revenue for openresch drops, they will need to increase cost to users since it is an offset model as previously mentioned.

    Annoyingly every premise in the UK coupd have fibre by now for what has been spent on multiple networks chasing fast revenue.

    Openreach are not to blame here.

    1. GNewton says:

      This old Thatcher story from Techradar is quite misleading. Nobody has prevented BT from doing fibre for well over decade now.

      It’s more a case of sheer incompetence on the part of BT, Ofcom, and various governments.

    2. Mark says:

      @Dave, good one for April 1st, believe a pooorly written and researched article of how someone in government stopped a roll out years and years before the tech was invented hahaha… because of course the 7 or 8 leaders we’ve had since and their MP’s are all utterly incapable of changing any laws and regulations right? As said above it was consecutive government and Offom and OpenReach members all rubbing each other’s backs for easy fat pay cheques that causes the backwards internet access the U.K. now faces. Not Tatcher!

  16. The Bosh says:

    Is this a great April Fool or the best use of irony ever.
    I live in a village in Pembrokeshire where the copper is travelling 1.5-2miles from the cabinet depending on where you live and is one of the windest places in the UK
    Only 120 properties in the village, Openreach are in the village 3 times a week.
    Speeds are awful, we have ditched copper and use 4G.
    How can they penalise the old technology?
    Our CC has a programme to deliver FTTP
    It won’t be long until Openreach have no customer

    1. In the know says:

      Openreach provide and maintain the network not sell products.

      They will continue to have customers because their customers are the Communications providers ( CP’s ).

      You are all customers of the said CP’s and buy your products from them, not from Openreach.

      Switching to a provider who still utilises the Openreach network makes not a jot of difference because the revenue will still end up in the same place.

  17. Martin E says:

    I can see a ‘new’ openreach ‘fibre first’ pole from where this is being typed, it’s been there for well over two years, it provides service to absolutely no one.
    No FTTC here, FTTP still as distant as ever. Current speed test? 2.7Mbps / 0.3Mbps over copper ADSL
    Like I said above, it’s in a ‘fibre first’ location, a location marked by openreach as ‘completed’ is not the arse end of nowhere otherwise I’d have a connection fast enough to download the entire internet twice before dinner.

    Last time I mentioned this, 18 months ago an openreach employee posting here ‘didn’t believe me’ posting endless random addresses where fibre was available locally. Well guess what, for me and countless others, NOTHING HAS CHANGED, and now, those stuck on ADSL will have to subside those on fibre.

    Lies, damn lies and openreach fibre claims

    1. Mark says:

      Don’t believe a word any Open Reach engineer tells you.. they can be right lazy what’s its.. and just read of a computer with inaccurate records, because no one has bothered to actually physically survey the site so they just blindly believe what the data tells them, when it was entered incorrectly years ago. I know of several examples of this, then again I know of Open Reach engineers who can’t fix simple issues with their own broadband like unfiltered sockets….

  18. A M says:

    I’ve just been upgraded on Fibre First – Fibre Cities – FTTP – I moved into my house 20 years ago and knew the BB was bad – Max 6 MBPS was all I ever got! Was paying £21/£25 a months ish. I am now paying £52 a month for FTTP 300 MBPS and whole home mesh – you need it in my house as walls are between 1 and 2 foot thick. Can get speeds of 900 MBPS.

    When you moved to your current home you surely must have checked BB Speeds! If you didn’t then tough your stuck with it as I was – wait for the upgrade which will come –


    1. Sam says:

      Oh please, do tell how we were supposed to check FTTP availability when moving house in the 90s!

  19. Mass-Insanity-by-Systematic-Corporate-Gaslighting says:

    “Hexinjack says: April 1, 2021 at 12:35 am

    “For those moaning they can’t get FTTP or even FTTC, do you know how much extra it costs to maintain copper infrastructure on long lines or to rural locations?””
    I know that doing the same waterlogged repair TEN TIMES must cost more than shifting the line ONCE up the pole that is just THREE meters away, and there is NO pro-active prevention of water-ingress, re-routing copper through sensible ducts that then are there when fibre comes, or other SENSIBLE policy. I spoke directly to a Bt Openreach Engineer and he said the WOOOSH system can correlate poor weather and faults and graph them in near-realtime. So BT know where the problems are, and refuse to fix them until the poor ignorant customer, who is even LIED-TO automatically (“our tests show the fault is within your premises”) manages to complain effectively.
    No wonder it costs so much. Too much orthodoxy-chasing and not enough intelligent management. As usual for a Government-sanctioned 1990-onwards MONOPOLY, no matter how much turd-polishing goes on (Bt Group owns Openreach, so it’s STILL BT Openreach, the point of removing the “BT” prefix was a form of politicised LYING, wasn’t it, since it’s business as usual?)
    Let engineers, NOT bean-counters and politicians run national infrastructure, and yes, in part it really IS that simple. The rest of the implementation and funding details can be negotiated. Would they REALLY end up costing more?
    But the amount of time that I’ve had wasted by the ISP and BT’s obfuscation, trying to cajole a whole 5Mbps out of my family’s rural copper line, would be valued at ££££ minimum. So who’s complaining about how uneconomical it is, again? Note, this likely one the best lines on the lane – 1.5km from the cabinet and I’ve had it sync at 7.5Mbps and 1.0 UP on ADSL MAX or whatever it really is – tweaked, or what?! That’s when the poor state of it isn’t impacting upon what the technology can do – and it’s BT’s CHOICE of technology, others exist that could perform better. I’d even consider running a LAN around the houses with a, say 60Mbps connection at the closest premises to the cabinet, just to get a few people a reliable 6-10Mbps, but hey, the oh-so-customer-centric rules don’t allow that, do they? See, in this country, it makes it too hard for the priority services, which OBVIOUSLY aren’t those that benefit US. So it makes it slightly harder, or legally-confusing (not that laws stop them doing what they want, note), for those poor old Government spies to distinguish people when the connections are mixed, you know? Plus hard to provide enough wholesale bandwidth when your bandwidth cost calculations are gambling on generally-low useage-per-premises, as Covid Homeworking has revealed. I’d run ten 80Mbps lines from the cabinet to a shed at the limit of that speed, aggregate it and route it somehow, then run CAT6 onwards from that with repeaters or whatever. It would be an engineering task, but FAR less hassle than the waste of time the cycle of “BT Openreach reticent repair – > water ingress over time – > speed gets impacted down to the 1-2Mbps level or lower – > Line crackle eventually proves a fault and/or line cuts-out completely -> Proven to ISP / BT Landline repair fault escalated – > BT Openreach reticent repair – > REPEAT”

    But hey, infrastructure is best left to privatised monopolies, right?

    1. Fastman says:

      so state controlled telecoms

      wait 9 months to get something fixed

      over a certain figure — not viable


  20. Mass-Insanity-by-Systematic-Corporate-Gaslighting says:

    “I’d run ten 80Mbps lines from the cabinet to a shed at the limit of that speed,” – meaning the limit of the DISTANCE that can attain that speed on a fairly-clean copper line.

    Note the BT automatic system lying to elderly family members that “our tests detect that the fault is inside your premises” is a form of gaslighting, since the test isn’t that accurate and they know this, if I know it. Hence the nickname… Pay attention to where psychological abuse really comes from, and what rolls downhill, you know? Peace.

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
    Speed: 200Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Community Fibre £20.00
    Speed: 150Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Virgin Media £24.00
    Speed: 108Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Vodafone £25.00
    Speed: 100Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Hyperoptic £25.00
    Speed: 158Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • Hyperoptic £17.99
    Speed 33Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Shell Energy £19.99
    Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • NOW £20.00
    Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Virgin Media £20.00
    Speed 54Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Vodafone £22.00
    Speed 38Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (4106)
  2. BT (3148)
  3. Politics (2113)
  4. Building Digital UK (2023)
  5. Openreach (1967)
  6. FTTC (1921)
  7. Business (1830)
  8. Mobile Broadband (1603)
  9. Statistics (1509)
  10. 4G (1376)
  11. FTTH (1371)
  12. Virgin Media (1276)
  13. Ofcom Regulation (1240)
  14. Wireless Internet (1233)
  15. Fibre Optic (1232)
  16. Vodafone (926)
  17. EE (904)
  18. 5G (896)
  19. TalkTalk (821)
  20. Sky Broadband (787)
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips

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