Connexin UK to Cover 22,000 Premises with Full Fibre in Beverley
Broadband ISP Connexin has today announced a new agreement with network integrator firm STL, which will see them invest a further £3m to take on rival KCOM and extend their 10Gbps capable Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) network across 22,000 premises in the East Yorkshire (England) market town of Beverley.
The network operator, which aims to cover 500,000 premises with their new fibre infrastructure (no timescale has been given), currently expects to complete its initial build (c.150,000 homes) around the city of Hull by the end of this financial year. But today’s move means that they’re now looking to extend into the town of Beverley, which resides to the north of Hull.
Sadly, the operator hasn’t yet said how long the roll-out to the town will take or precisely where it’s due to start (we couldn’t see anything listed on One.Network), although Connexin has made fairly good progress on their build in Hull, so it’s not a huge stretch for them to grow that into the new area.
Advertisement
Ashley Achmed, VP of Infrastructure, said:
“We are proud to partner with STL, a highly experienced Tier 1 national builder of fibre networks. This £3 million commitment will empower customers with a choice of provider and a full online experience, improving lives. This is a significant move towards our goal of increasing our fibre footprint for the people of East Yorkshire.”
Richard Breffitt, COO of STL, added:
“We are delighted to be working with Connexin to bring greater choice and connectivity to communities in Hull. We look forward to developing this partnership in the coming years.”
Residential customers of the provider’s unlimited FTTP service tend to pay from £37.50 per month for a speed of 125Mbps (symmetric) on an 18-month term, which rises to £49.99 for their top 1000Mbps tier.
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, BlueSky, Threads.net and Linkedin.
Uh-oh! Looking at their rollout in Hull this is probably going to involve quite a lot of poles!
Poor Beverley will be getting swamped with telegraph poles.
Connexion, another company just like MS3 Networks has no concern for the locals and will not share already in place infrastructure, doubling up and in some places tripling up the number of telegraph poles down streets.
Parasites all these companies, after maximum profit and sod the locals feelings.
Just look at what these companies are doing, destroying the views of towns like Hessle and Hedon which already had their Internet connections supplied via underground ducts.
‘destroying the views’
Jeez. Make it out like these poles don’t already exist in these places!
I know you’ll continue to ignore anything mentioning this but has it ever struck you as strange that MS3 make extensive use of existing infrastructure everywhere bar KCom areas?
You think MS3 have some weird grudge against that area so insist on using poles there?
Rather than obsessing over Going Underground maybe pull your head out of the sand?
I know on the Facebook group you guys routinely delete things mentioning this.
I very much doubt you are but if you wanted to make it look like you’re an astroturfing campaign on behalf of KCom you couldn’t do a lot more than steadfastly and stubbornly ignoring that side of the equation as indeed you are.
Again, this refusal to consider it is actively harming your campaign. I would support it wholeheartedly if you were focusing on this rather than trying to break things nationwide that are largely fine.
I will simplify if you like, Jason.
MS3 in Hedon: Poles. Lots of poles.
Cross the Humber.
MS3 in Immingham: Many fewer poles.
Incumbent local operator in Hedon: KCom.
Incumbent local operator in Immingham: Openreach.
Do KCom have a regulated physical infrastructure access product with published price lists, terms and conditions? No.
Do Openreach have a regulated physical infrastructure access product with published price lists, terms and conditions? Yes. In fact the regulation kicked in after their first version of the product was basically unusable and, indeed, wasn’t really used.
It’s not a lot more complicated than 1+1=2. If by some miracle you come back to this I’ll leave it with you to think over.
PS I see one of the campaigners at least calling use of poles a ‘loophole’. It isn’t. Forcing operators to use existing infrastructure regardless of costs and practicality means the incumbent can extort them: it would prevent them from digging their own ducts either!
Actually there’s a point. You guys campaign on wanting them to build underground but want the law changed to close this ‘loophole’ so that they can’t build their own infrastructure full stop if there’s pre-existing.
Interesting.