First CityFibre UK ISP Launches Cheap 2.5Gbps Broadband Plan UPDATE
Broadband provider Yayzi appears to have quietly become the first ISP on CityFibre’s national Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) network to launch a symmetric speed 2.5Gbps package for UK consumers, which will set you back just £45 per month on an 18-month term (inc. free wireless router). Now that’s cheap.
The change, which was spotted yesterday by ISPreview’s readers (here), is naturally only possible in areas where CityFibre has completed the rollout programme for their new XGS-PON network upgrade, which technically makes it possible for their network to support end-user speeds of up to 10Gbps (here).
Until now we’ve only seen Vodafone deploy a 2Gbps tier on CityFibre’s new XGS-PON network platform (here), but that was just a trial and it has yet to become generally available. By comparison, Yayzi’s new package is, somewhat unofficially, already showing up in their availability checker for those locations they cover where XGS-PON has been enabled.
Customers who attempt to order the new package are currently being given installation dates around mid-July, although Yayzi has said that these dates are tentative and may change. A spokesperson for Yayzi has since provided a bit more detail via Reddit: “It’s definitely coming, I can’t give exact dates just yet, but it’s imminent. It’ll be a 2.5GbE RJ45 presentation, static IPs are available, we use DHCP and SOON!”
At this point it should be said that harnessing a speed of 2.5Gbps online is still rather tricky, particularly since it’s already difficult enough to max out a 1Gbps line via most online services (Why Buying Gigabit Broadband Doesn’t Always Deliver 1Gbps), although some platforms (e.g. Steam, Microsoft) are catching up.
Despite this, we’re increasingly moving into a more mature FTTP market, where marketing battles over advertised speeds will inevitably become much more common as ISPs try to differentiate themselves (countries with more mature FTTP markets saw similar activity).
UPDATE 12:22pm
We’ve just spoken to Yayzi about this and have a bit more detail. Firstly, the pricing given in their availability checker appears to be part of a test, which we’ve been told does not reflect the final price of the new 2.5Gbps product. The final package is actually expected to cost £50 a month (or £55 on a monthly rolling term) and there will be a £99 one-off set-up cost (they’re trying to reduce this).
The reason for that £99 set-up fee is due to the extra cost of the router they’ll be bundling into the package, which we’re told will be a TP Link EX820v (this has both a 2.5Gb WAN and a 2.5Gb LAN port). The package will also come with a static IP included and IPv6 is currently in testing (expected to roll out “very soon“). Sadly, there’s not yet a solid launch date to announce.
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 X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook and Linkedin.
« Rural UK ISP Quickline Launch Zero Conditions FTTP Broadband Deal
County Broadband See Success with Connecting Remote UK Homes »
Latest UK ISP News
- FTTP (5557)
- BT (3523)
- Politics (2545)
- Openreach (2307)
- Business (2272)
- Building Digital UK (2248)
- FTTC (2049)
- Mobile Broadband (1981)
- Statistics (1791)
- 4G (1673)
- Virgin Media (1628)
- Ofcom Regulation (1470)
- Fibre Optic (1398)
- Wireless Internet (1395)
- FTTH (1382)
1.5gb of pointless bandwidth availability that will just sit unused
ok boomer. I know I can use it.
My 10 and 25G NICS and switches alongside the 2.5G port on my laptop and that I can hit 1.6 Gbit/s over wireless 6e on something as humble as my phone say otherwise.
similar situation, i’ve got a 10gig network and my altnet is apparently 10 gig capable. the only thing stopping them is the rj45 port on the ONT being 1g
Quite a few routers with WiFi6 and 6e have 2.5gbps wan ports on them. Only going to get more commonplace in future given Cat5e cable can support it.
You can easily get computers with or add multiple 2.5Gbe NICs that run something like pfsense or opnsense.
good for the speedtest bragging rights though, and that’s all that matters to some.
Of course in reality all the 1+Gbps ISPs are going to get all the fun support calls from people demanding to know “why they aren’t getting what they pay for”… because their PCs or games consoles, switches etc only have gigabit ethernet.
“Yayzi” seem to be silent on whether they support things that actually matter, like IPv6.
More than that, I expect.
Need the equipment to make use of it as well.
Rich: “ok boomer. I know I can use it.”
Good to see uninformed, reactionary, judgemental ageism is the order of the day in Rich-land.
@andrew I guess I’m just bored of every news article about higher speeds being met with comments telling me how I don’t need it, which is a very presumptive attitude. I guess in Jason’s day he sent messages via telegram and liked it, but it adds nothing to the conversation.
Plenty of people are fully able to use 2.5G thanks.
I’d be wary of signing up to a contract on the Cityfibre network, could end up with a load of hassle.
Cityfibre is currently looking for a buyer, it’s well known the CEO has been in discussions regarding selling the company to a rival.
You wouldn’t be signing a contract with Cityfibre; you’d be signing a contract with an ISP that’s one of Cityfibre’s wholesale customers.
If the ownership of Cityfibre changes, you won’t need to change ISP or the way you use your broadband – in fact, you won’t see any difference at all.
It’s possible the new Cityfibre owner renegotiates the terms for its wholesale customers, in which case this may cause your retail broadband price to rise – but only from the end of your contract. I’d say this is unlikely, given that Cityfibre’s entire raison d’etre is to undercut Openreach wholesale pricing, and they won’t want to bleed wholesale customers.
But even if it does happen, you might as well enjoy a good deal now if you can get it.
Still touting that old chestnut?
If that rumor is true, then it’s been up for sale for months with no takers lol
By avoiding the network you’re pushing them to need to sell also. If they get no customers I’m not sure how they’re going to make their investment back.
Best thing to do is to buy services from them, then your OR lines in place as a fallback if things do go wrong.
@Matt, I tend to agree with you, I was like Gordon before I signed up to ZZoomm, with the new about them laying off people and me being worried about if they go under that one of the large providers like Talk Talk may grab hold of them, but sometimes you just have to grab the bull by the horns.
Don’t get me wrong, i still have that feeling of what happens if they do go under, but I push it to the back of my mind.
@Badem – Clearly more than just a rumour…
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2023/03/virgin-media-o2-uk-ponder-3bn-acquisition-of-rival-cityfibre.html
Badem: If that rumor is true, then it’s been up for sale for months with no takers lol
I’ve run the sale process for a tech company of similar scale to Cityfibre, and I can assure you that no news means nothing. M&A with a several hundred million price tag is never quick. Outside a very small team of involved parties, nobody knows until something has been agreed, usually after many months of work. The only exception is if a company is in administration, then the administrators will usually say they’re looking for a buyer, but beyond that no details emerge. And if you’re not part of the deal team, you’ll be left to get on with your work, even if logically what you’re doing should wait for the M&A to conclude.
There’s lots of companies who will be contacting their investment bank or advisers to see who’s for sale in the telecoms market, and they’ll then ask the bank who’s been asked to manage the (potential) sale for an information memorandum of the key numbers. In city finance circles this will be common knowledge, outside of those much less so, although it’s the ripples from a bank taking a mandate to advise on a transaction that drives the rumour mill.
At this stage neither company has talked, nobody has committed to anything or offered anything. If the IM looks promising they’ll then start to do more thorough investigation, and at some point the target will create a deal room that contains every piece of info the company can lay its hands on, leases, contracts, suppliers, sales and contracts, customer analysis, maps and technical details on assets owned and technology standards, business software used and licence agreements, detail headcount analysis, tax analysis, all legal agreements on financing, detailed accounts and forecasts, management accounts etc. There’s a vast amount of material involved. That deal room will have VERY restricted access, everybody accessing it has to sign an NDA, and everything they look at is logged. The shortlisted potential buyers will have a period of say six weeks to root around in all that and decide whether they want to go forward. If they do, they’ll be invited to put in a bid. That may be subject to negotiation, there may be a second round bidding, and even then there’s usually a whole load of legal clarifications.
I’d be surprised if Vodafone weren’t interested this way each of the future mobile providers are major infrastructure estate holders with BT having the openreach network and O2 now being one with virgin
Would that be similar to Virgin buying trooli, talktalk and city fibre as well then?
Telegraph posts one article and not heard much since, are you perhaps a director at VM or Cityfibre Gordon? Didn’t think so.
A deal could be in talks in the background but to post don’t go with this company as its possible they will be sold is a bit mental… yeah let’s buy someone for 3 billion and disconnect every customer.
Wow impressive and a good price too!, I know I don’t have any gear capable of more than 1gbps
If they had IPv6 support I’d have been interested but AFAICT they do not. It doesn’t help that the FAQ on their website throws a 404 and their support form has zero posts.
Why do you need IPv6 support? The majority of providers don’t have IPv6 support, ok, so with IPv6 there is no need for NAT, but for the normal Joe it makes little difference.
I must admit I thought IPv6 would have taken off better than it has, certainly with IPv4 addresses getting few and far between, but the internet seems to be coping.
Plusnet done a trial of IPv6 and for some reason that is as far as it got, My provider Zzoomm don’t have IPv6 either. It will happen I expect, but when is another thing.
As for Yayzi website, they are not the only ones that have links going nowhere, sometimes things are moved and links are not changed, Granted it should be sorted, maybe somone should tell them. Zzoomm’s website is awful, lots of outdated info still there from where they first started, but the broadband at the moment is good.
Forums, ummm, maybe people are happy and have no need to use them, or they have not got enough customers yet.
I almost made the mistake of taking notice of people on the, net, mainly my ISP facebook page, I am glad i decided to go ahead
Why do people always have to question the necessity of IPv6?
Yayzi are a new ISP and therefore presumably don’t have masses of IPv4 addresses to go around (do they use CGNAT?). This does make a difference for servers and port forwarding, games and services that do not tolerate NAT well.
As they are a new ISP, they have none of the issues that the older providers had. If BT and Sky can overcome the challenges and give it to all of their customers, so should everyone else.
But most of all, they are an internet service provider. IPv6 is part of the internet. It is literally their job to provide it, and hopefully they do. We should not have to rely on bodges like CGNAT to keep things going.
@Ivor
IPv6 is only an absolute necessity for folks like IT Administrators. IPv4 connections (static or dynamic) are perfectly fine for the rest of us.
No, it isn’t a necessity for IT administrators. We’ve NAT and VPNs. Everything doesn’t need to be publicly addressable.
Correction:
Whilst the latter is true, I missed the part about a router being included.
My thoughts on this speed is if your are in normal household you don’t need this kind of speed anyway unless your household are gaming fanatics, I had the Gig 1 from virgin the speed never went above 950 download I’m now on 350 meg download I don’t notice any difference webpages load just as fast, if your a massive downloader then yes maybe 1 Gig might be ok but that’s about all so guys think before you jump on this bandwagon you don’t need this kind of speed.
Of course you don’t need this type of speed. But you also don’t need a powerful, luxurious car. Or a big house. Or holidays abroad. But it’s sure nice to have it.
And you don’t need to tell us we don’t need it, but here we are!
Maybe people don’t but you need to look at it the other way. Upload. People might get the higher package for upload. I run 8 4K cameras 24/7 on my leased line and I have to shave off 250mbps upload just to run them.. Gosh to get 2.5Gbps PON for £55 a month is literally heaven compared to what I have and what I pay now.
Of course it is that’s what I thought but in the end for me it’s not worth it IMHO.