UBS Predicts Openreach to Lose 800k UK Broadband Lines in 2025
The latest analyst note from Swiss Bank UBS has maintained their long-running “sell” rating on the BT Group and predicted that Openreach could lose 800,000 broadband lines to rival networks in 2025 (up from 707k in 2024). The analyst warned that the operator needed to “deploy fibre faster” to stem the bleed and “accelerate [its] cost-cutting“, otherwise they claim it may face a downside risk to free cash flow in FY26.
“We reiterate our view that BT is seeing rising broadband infrastructure competition that is putting pressure on both Openreach and Consumer revenues and we think Openreach needs to deploy fibre faster,” said UBS. The bank continues to hold BT Group under a “sell” rating and points to a 12-month price target of 120p. The current market price is typically hovering around 165-166p (up from a low of c.105p at this time last year).
The BT Group is currently investing up to £15bn on their deployment of multi-gigabit capable Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) broadband technology, which already covers c. 18 million UK premises and is building at a rate of around 1 million premises per quarter. Openreach aims to reach 25 million premises by December 2026 and then holds an ambition to cover “up to” 30 million premises by 2030.
Advertisement
In terms of the positives. Openreach has been delivering good take-up of their FTTP network (c.35% – a figure that tends to be suppressed during rapid network builds) and Ofcom’s new Telecoms Access Market Review 2026 (TAR) didn’t propose any radical or hugely negative changes. Rival alternative networks are also under significant financial pressures, and many have had to slow or even pause their network builds. The BT Group also benefits from an established base of several hundred supporting ISPs and plenty of related brand familiarity.
On the flip side, some altnets are continuing to build at a rapid pace (e.g. Netomnia) and others (e.g. CityFibre) are looking to grow significant scale through consolidation. At the same time, those altnets that did slow their builds have instead switched strategies to focus on greater commercialisation, which means more effort going toward pulling customers away from Openreach and BT. The move by one of the market’s largest altnets, CityFibre, to sign-up Sky Broadband to their network is another problem for Openreach (here), although it remains to be seen how much of an impact this will have.
At a certain point, Openreach may look to respond by trying to push another round of wholesale price cuts on FTTP lines through Ofcom (i.e. Equinox 3). But BT’s past commitments mean that the earliest we might see this is spring 2026. In the meantime, Openreach may struggle to match some of the prices being charged by altnets, which will themselves no doubt complain that they’re in a vulnerable state and could be put under strain if the incumbent is given more flexibility on pricing (although consumers would benefit from a price war).
The suggestion that Openreach should deploy their FTTP build “faster” is another interesting one to consider, not least because their focus over the next few years will increasingly switch to rural areas and semi-rural towns / suburbs (most of the big urban locations are already very advanced in their coverage). The nature of such locations is that roll-outs tend to slow, and costs rise, as properties become harder to reach and sit further away from exchanges.
Advertisement
One other risk to consider is Virgin Media’s move to open up their newer XGS-PON full fibre (FTTP) network to wholesale in the very near future, which when combined with nexfibre’s coverage (technically a sibling by similar parents) could give Openreach a run for their money (particularly once the XGS-PON upgrades finish in 2028). But much of this will depend upon VM/nexfibre’s ability to offer attractive pricing and terms at wholesale, and we still don’t know exactly how they’ll be positioned.
One final point to make is that analysts are constantly changing their opinions, which tend to vary quite a bit. For example, BNP Paribas upgraded BT to “neutral” last week, Barclays rated them “underweight” earlier in March, Arete upgraded them to “buy” in Feb, Citi downgraded and Goldman recommended “buy” in January etc.
The reality today is that we’re rapidly moving past the mid-way point of the national FTTP roll-out, and the wider market is in a state of some flux. Time will tell how it all pans out.
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.
« UK ISP TalkTalk Business Recovers Email After Long Outage
Advertisement
Leave a Reply
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 entries for comment content, display name, IP and email 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.
I don’t dismiss them and their take on things, but sometimes I think such financial analysts are more about the ‘vibes’ rather than a strong, rigourous analysis of the situation.
Their opinions are based on detailed analysis. It has to be in order to sell the fully detailed reports to their clients.
This just shows that is time for Ofcom to start loosening regulations of BT/Openreach and start applying tighter regulations more equitably across all the major providers. Far from having an advantage, BT is now being hit with more effective competition from the debt-funded altnets while being held back by the mass of heritage infrastructure.
Point: “Most of the big urban locations are already very advanced”: The level of Openreach’s coverage in London is very low; it is a long way from adequate. Even if they do have fibre deployed in any given area of London, it does not mean that they will be able to provide a connection for many shared properties passed by the fibre.
Err no thanks. BT has had decades post that her to get their act together and they decided to sweat copper. ONLY when Altnets got going did they decide to do FTTP and then they deployed and still deploy legacy GPON.
The world no longer has to put up with BT fan boys and share holders dictating what legacy product we can have. BT inherited a vast infrastructure at much lower cost than if they built from scratch, unlike the ALTNETS. No thanks to dinosaurs milking us like BT and Vermin Media.
Show me the altnet that’s been able to match Openreach’s cost per premises connected and I’ll agree.
@ anonymous:
You make assertions without any evidence to support your claims; rather, they are just examples of the usual uniformed rants.
Ofcom has a duty to regulate the market as it is. It is currently reviewing market regulation. Over the coming years the market will come to be dominated by the three principal providers and perhaps one of the AltNets. Ofcom must act to regulate all parties to ensure the market functions fairly. This has nothing to do with “FanBoy” labelling of those that you disagree with.
Further, BT Openreach is held back by the legacy network, something the current regulatory regime is causing to go on longer than necessary. It therefore puts BT at a disadvantage and imposes additional costs which have to be passed onto existing customers – something all the other providers are avoiding. It is therefore Ofcom’s duty to restore balance and impose regulation and sharing of costs on the other players in the market.
@Polish Poler:
The AltNets should have lower provisioning costs if they are using there own networks.
Cost per premises connected includes cost to build the network reaching the premises and all other business activities associated.
Even assuming building the network was free Openreach can still connect for less than anyone else thanks to economies of scale, preexisting infrastructure and drop, lower cost ONT, being default for many new builds, etc.
Even the most efficient altnets can’t match Openreach costs. So they’re all universally incompetent, Openreach have some secret sauce unknown to anyone else worldwide or Openreach have obvious and well documented advantages coming from incumbency.
@Polish Poler:
You are not comparing like for like. Openreach does indeed benefit from scale, but it is burdened by the costs of the heritage network that will still exist even if a customer is moved to an FTTP connection, up until the network is decommissioned. The AltNets have lower organisation costs due to smaller and simpler organisational structures, while not having systems built to support heritage infrastructure. Further, connection costs do not include network build, but are just for the connection to the existing fibre trunk.
You mentioned connection costs specifically, Fara, I said cost per premises connected. This is the cost to get network built to a premises and that premises connected to said network, as opposed to cost per premises passed.
Loosening regulation on FTTP during the transition period means either tightening it again afterwards or leaving Openreach an unquestionable and likely illegal advantage requiring primary legislation to avoid legal action from other operators. Like for like comparison is alternative networks’ fibre operations versus Openreach fibre operations. Openreach copper maintenance costs are operational and separate from that: no-one can connect premises as quickly or cheaply as they are to an FTTP network.
Openreach are being allowed to stop-sell copper and FTTC, regulation on the copper has been relaxed to reflect transition. Openreach are recovering copper from ducts nationwide as part of transition, many exchanges will be retired. Deregulating FTTP further is not a proportional response, deregulation would be far better applied to allowing Openreach to accelerate retirement of copper.
Even without the deregulation you’d like they’re hardly doing badly. Uptake even in competitive areas is way ahead of altnets, build is proceeding on schedule and under budget. This despite being more expensive than much of the competition and deploying legacy technology.
@Polish Poler: Connection costs do not include build-out. You are therefore not comparing like for like. Further, BT carries the cost of the heritage network, which is passed on to its customers in contrast to its competitors.
@Polish Poler:
BT does not have an illegal advantage.
The market will be in a considerably different state at the start of the next regulatory period from just a few years ago, yet Ofcom is not showing any signs of a significant review to take into account the consolidation of the players. That leaves the market unbalanced.
@Polish Poler: The costs of the heritage infrastructure are accounted separately, but they must still be passed on to the customers. As ISPs migrate off the heritage infrastructure, BT will be left with increasing costs and declining revenues from those assets. The consequences are thus clear to see.
BT deserve it honestly, when they are still charging more for FTTC in areas that don’t have any access to FTTP yet.
They have also had years to get their act together but we’re too busy focusing on other things like BT sport to give people what they want, fast internet.
Thing is, I doubt the alt nets are doing the most damage. OR have just ceased thousands of exchange lines (making it a real pain in rural areas), I bet those count as “lost” customers.
There are businesses that used to have 5-10+ lines that all had broadband on them whether used or not that have changed to a single SOGEA line.
Hataras systems that are being replaced with a single VDSL.
HMOs where every room sometimes had a line but now fttp, it’s just a single one for the building.
The better, faster products mean we don’t need multiple lines to run everything anymore.
What programme is seeing Openreach cease exchange based services and leaving people with no service?
There are pushes to get people off copper to part-fibre and preferably full fibre if available, but cutting them off is something both ISPreview and thinkbroadband would love to hear from people who have been cut off.
Agree. Moving to FTTP is a significant change and using a crude line number is misleading.
An SME moving from multiple phone lines to a simple FTTP feed with multiple VoIP means BT can offer a better solution and lower cost.
However Openreach need to get their ISPs moving on FTTP conversion and be more sensitive to Digital Voice variants. The PSTN closure date going back has given ISPs time to delay impact to their customers.
As for BT Consumer, my experience is that you can lower your broadband cost converting from FTTC to FTTP with BT but they could still do more. I think BT are losing a trick with a lower tier FTTP/Voice, their proposed pre-Digital Phone expedient and their BT Hybrid Connect backup needs a rethink.
My view remains that for SME business and some consumers resilience is more important than excessive speed that may not be utilised. ie, two lower FTTPs from both Openreach and an Altnet would be better than one big pipe from either and a larger provider may be more capable to resource damage to plant via extreme weather or other.
The report specifically reflects upon the impact of the Sky and TalkTalk businesses. The AltNets have been factors in the changed trajectory of the rating, but it is not related to the decline in the demand for the POTS service. The latter is well understood and is to BT’s advantage in the long term.
@Andrew Ferguson:
There is no such initiative. The public is abandoning landline numbers at the rate of something like 12pc to 13pc per quarter through their own choice. People are increasingly reliant upon mobile services, with residential landline numbers in sharp decline.
@Meadmodj: The planning is well in hand. BT has no control over how fast other providers using its infrastructure move, but the deadlines are there, and you can inspect the guidance if you want to.
So far the vast majority of Openreach’s losses have been in areas that they have yet to install themselves. It would be surprising if they didn’t lose customers after going from being a monopoly to having competitors (VMO2 areas excepted). I seem to remember they were predicting a 40-55% take up rate for their network, they have easily beat that in our area despite competition from 2 altnets.
I find that somewhat surprising. We have had FTTP from BT/OR) available in the majority of the village for over ten years. Recently had City Fibre come in with their FTTP offering. What is being seen and heard is the majority of people taking up CF are newcomers who don’t know that BT/OR FTTP is available and so think that only CF FTTP is the only offer.
Do think that BT need to sell their product more where they can especially if their FTTP offer is some years old.
As for the delay in getting FTTP rolled out we have to blame OfCom/HMG in the early 1990’s for stopping BT from starting then on ‘Competion’ grounds – I’mm not allowed to express my thoughts on that though.
Openreach are always very slow and way behind. I blamed BT for greedy shareholders as they always aim to put shareholders first before the country outcry for full fivre roll out.
They aren’t a charity or social enterprise. They have to put the shareholders first else they have no way to raise money for full fibre and go bankrupt. We aren’t entitled to full fibre.
BT/Openreach are building FTTP faster than anyone else and have been for the past couple of years.
What is your evidence? Have you not been reading the articles regarding progress?
Shareholders are always the problem, they want more and more and don’t care who toes they tread on to get it, just look at the supermarkets and what they are doing.
Openreach should be split off and made into a non-profit-making company, like Welsh water is, but no doubt still get greedy people at the top
I do mean the top shareholders, the ones that have a say in things
@Ad47uk:
It is the shareholders who take the risks of losing all their investments, so it is right that they take profits when they can. Constant attacks on businesses and capitalism are made by those who have been raised with the expectation that others should fund their lifestyle. This is not how the real world works.
Openreach is the property of BT. If anything, it is time for Ofcom to step back from its focus on the regulation of Openreach and instead focus on regulating the market as a whole, which now has multiple players – most of which do not allow other providers access to their own networks unlike BT.
@Fara82Light
I know it is shareholder that takes the risks, but they are also greedy, want more, more and more, not content with a bit of profit, the company I work for, just complained because their profits will be flat at £1 billion. Come on, I am sure a lot of companies would be happy with half that in profits. Sadly, it is the workers that have to suffer to get more profits.
If people can’t afford to lose money, then don’t be a shareholder, simple as that.
I know how the real world works, money goes to money and people are greedy and want more and more.
I know who openreach belongs to, which proves that the rubbish we were told years ago about them being separate was just lies, like we are always told, lies from the government, lies from the police, lies from organisations and lies from companies.
They think taking the Openreach name of the vans foll us, well they may fool some people.
While it is too late now because we now have more competition, Openreach should have been split from BT full stop, sold to another company and have nothing to do with BT whatsoever.
It is not just BT, I say the same thing with our electric and gas as well, the infrastructure should be government owned
Bt have for years, even before broadband, ripped us off with high prices and the only reason they had to lower prices was when they had competition. Bt are not the only company that have done that when they have had the monopoly, I remember Vodafone and sky doing it and Sky still do it.
I think BT should still have restrictions for the next 4-5 years at least, give others time to get their networks up and running and give Bt more competition. Openreach has an advantage above every other company apart from maybe Virgin and maybe Kcom in Hull and that is the majority of people are already on their network via FTTC and the majority of people will just stick with the ISP they are with and change to FTTP.
@Ad47uk:
Businesses maximise profits. Those that do not will not last long. Shareholders are not the problem. Shareholders are fully aware of the risks of losing their funds; many will take losses on a regular basis, but they nett those losses against their successes. Without private sector investment, these businesses and the services they provide would not exist.
These unbalanced and odd ideas you are expressing about business illustrate why the UK is struggling. In other parts of the world, you will find children better informed and better equipped for the modern world.
@Ad47uk: The failure of other major players to build out their own core networks was never a good reason to force BT to sell Openreach. There are those who have a vitriolic hatred of BT, but that is a matter for themselves, not for government policy.
@Ad47uk: I agree that the current regime will probably continue, but that is more likely to happen because Ofcom is not looking at how the market is evolving nor how it could quickly consolidate in the coming period.
As to BT ripping off customers, the numbers show this to be untrue. Its share price has hardly moved from its current level since the late 80s. If anything, it is trading lower. It also survived a period when debts nearly cost the business its independence. It is the failure to allow BT to make greater profit from its assets that means it will not remain independent for much longer.
BT is over-regulated. Ofcom should make the effort to apply a more level playing field and start imposing obligations on all players such as opening up their networks to other players.
‘the only thing that is still competing is cable and even that now belongs to Virgin and is no doubt why it can still keep going.’
‘@Polish Poler, yes, I know the history of Virgin Media and how they got to where they are and what they grabbed hold off.’
Then you’ll know that Virgin Media don’t belong to ‘Virgin’ and never have. I was responding to 125us though.
‘Ad47uk says:
April 22, 2025 at 8:38 am
@Fara82Light
I know it is shareholder that takes the risks, but they are also greedy, want more, more and more, not content with a bit of profit
Ad47uk says:
April 17, 2025 at 5:47 pm
@Bt Ivor, if Bt have cracked how to make money and to be honest with all the years they have been in business and the high charges we have paid for years, why are their share prices still rubbish?’
Seems a bit strange mocking a stock price and 5 days later complaining about shareholders wanting more and not being content with a bit of profit.
@Polish Poler:
Complaints about shareholders being greedy is nonsensical. Every grouping relating to human activity is greedy – unions, socialists, customers, etc, etc. Businesses are not charities, and they soon fail when the socialist take over.
Il believe it when I see it, once FTTP gets rolled out to areas and they overbuild some Alt Nets then the vast majority will always go back to trusted brands that they know so well.
Like it or not its happening at the moment. Particularly in villages where alt nets promised the world and the service hasnt been as expected
“Trusted brands” – the only thing you can trust is yearlyinflation busting price increases with them.
@anonymous, Hear, Hear.
I realise that cost has increased for every business, but changing prices while in a contract is unfair and should not be allowed. If they are allowed to put up prices, then consumer should be allowed to get out of the contract and the excuse that we know about the price rise before we join don’t hold as for many people they have very little choice but to choose a provider on Openreach network.
It was Plusnet pushing me to a 24-month contract, be it via FTTC or FTTP that pushed me to Zzoomm. While price did come into it a bit, but mainly because I did not want to enter a contract where the price was going to rise.
Anhyway, I am on a better FTTP network that I would get with Openreach.
Openreach losing out. Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
Indeed. Further, as the debt funds are used up, the AltNets will have to start charging realistic prices (or sell-up/merge), which will see many customers switch to the large-scale providers who will be able to offer cheaper packages.
Recently tried to upgrade my current FTTC connection to FTTP & Openreach dropped the ball several times over the course of 3 months until I cancelled the upgrade.
Survey required & date confirmed via ISP, received text from Openreach with date, Openreach turned up 3 weeks early.
Survey completed, sent to me so I could sign off as new duct required to be dug in front garden.
Date given for external works to be completed by, no sign of Openreach then external works reported as completed to ISP, I report back no external works carried out.
ISP quired Openreach, they report back a 2nd survey is required & I received a text with a date.
Of course on the date there’s no sign of Openreach.
I contacted ISP & cancelled the FTTP upgrade.
I have City Fibre already at the bottom of the garden & I’ll go FTTP with them instead.
Cityfibre is a superior product anyway than BTs legacy GPON product. You most likely bd on XGS-PON and have symmetric speeds, no product capping limitations like an Openreach based fttp network and you’ll get more gor your money, depending on the ISP you choose on Cityfibre.
I became a sky customer with sky on the 6th March for broadband @ home teplephone
.since that date have not had any telephone connection. Sky have told me that it is a problem with their engineers and/or openreach and l cannot contact them to ask what is wrong
Why is this
6
U
That’s a question for Sky to answer. You’re their customer and it’s their job to keep you informed.
You should probably check if you’ve Internet Calls. If you do a phone into the old phone socket isn’t going to work.
https://www.sky.com/help/articles/set-up-hub-broadband-hub-do-you-have-internet-calls
But I thought the BT fan boys on here were saying ALTNETS were no threat.
Looks like they are running scared now.
Most of the ALTNETS with their superior symmetric network, low latency, some eith good routers supplied, all UK support and in most cases better pricing, with some like Netomnia doing no in contract price increases and new customer pricing when re-contracting. Yep, BT in the shade.
Now bring on Sky over Cityfibre, and watch BT line count fall further.
BT with its legacy GPON product, in contract price increases every year…
have the altnets figured out how to make money yet? BT seems to have cracked it, everyone else seems to be relying on fudging the numbers by claiming that they are EBITDA positive, rather than actual profitability. Charging rock bottom prices and using unnecessarily expensive equipment is apparently not the way to do it.
I think some are overreacting to one analyst’s reckon (while ignoring Openreach’s actual results, where they point out that their losses are mostly in FTTC/ADSL areas). Much like the obsession with the idea that the entire country yearns for that multi gig symmetric service!
Ah BT’s spokesman has appeared and made a statement 🙂
BT cracked it? Debateable. They took on existing customers from ADSL and FTTC for majority more like. Some ALTNETS are now showing positive cash flows, already in this early stage.
Mid to longer term, they are flogging a dead horse with their LEGACY GPON product and pricing. Word is starting to slowly get around, and 5 members of friends and family are changing from either BT or Vermin Media to an ALTNET (in fact all are in Netomnia areas bar one who is CityFibre).
Expect more devastation to build as time goes by for BT. It’s not going to get better.
@Bt Ivor, if Bt have cracked how to make money and to be honest with all the years they have been in business and the high charges we have paid for years, why are their share prices still rubbish?
Companies that are making money, normally their shares go up.
BT have been extracting the Urine from the British public for years, charging sky-high prices for crackling lines and old ADSL/FTTC technology, even telling us that FTTC was fibre.
That is what it says on the Cabinet down the road from me, Fibre is here. It may be true now, but it was not true when that poster was put up.
@anonymous, LOL.
I am glad Openreach/BT have got competition, should have happened years ago. Broadband now is required for many people, and it is good that they are getting a choice, well, some. Need to be more people getting that choice.
But it also runs the other way, my partner is on Gigclear, she can’t get openreach FTTP where she lives and Openreach don’t seem to be interested as not enough people there. Not that she would choose Openreach now, but as she said, people need a choice.
Talking to her neighbours, she seems to think that none of her neighbours would change now anyway.
It is the same with mobile networks, we will be down to 3 soon.
Anyone who signs up for an AltNet-hosted service should keep in mind that many do not have sustainable cash flow and will disappear. As that trend progresses, the cost of the packages offered by the AltNets will rise to sustainable levels, which will be far higher than what is being asked at present (simply to boost cash-flow) in order to boost numbers.
Fara82Light, I’d still take the ALTNET’s offering due to superior symmetric network and forward strategic thinking, rather than BT’s legacy product GPON and capped upload speeds.
Also, YouFibre have no in contract price increases and started the ball rolling with re-contracting customers having same access to new customer deal pricing.
I live on the only road in my village with an Openreach monopoly. Other people are paying half what I do for 500Mb and get symmetric gigabit with lower latency and fewer outages than I’ve had.
The router I was provided just about managed 400Mb because PPPoE provides zero benefits on FTTP and has a massive performance penalty on high speed connections, most altnets are using DHCP.
Openreach will always be stuck in the past.
@anonymous: BT does not need to provide an over-speced service to attract customers, and the pricing the AltNets are offering now will not last much longer. You will have to engage with realistic pricing before too long.
PPPoE works fine with quality equipment, including that which most ISPs hand out.
The choice of PPPoE or DHCP is left to the ISP, rather than one imposed by Openreach, so this is not a valid point of comparison to the altnets.
Given that almost all altnets use some form of PON, the latency difference will also likely be down to the network architecture or competency of your chosen ISP – and at least Openreach actually has a decent mix of ISPs as compared to almost all altnets.
There are also other things to consider, like the number of customers per PON segment, or where the equipment is located. Openreach always put theirs in exchanges and always have resilient power. Some altnets stick it all in cabinets. You get what you pay for…
Digital Voice variants . . . bring ’em on.
My phone line was just converted to Digital Voice and, as expected, I had to order a couple of DECT adapters for the upstairs rooms.
The reception on these is appalling. Muted, crackly far worse than the 10 year old C-Tek DECT repeater unit that they replaced and way worse than the old analogue line reception – that’s despite allocating one DECT adapter to one phone, jiggling the unit locations around, operating on just one DECT unit at a time. No improvement.
And the wired Decor handset connecting directly to the back of the hub isn’t much better. No crackle, but very muted audio.And the bed-side Duet handset won’t ring unless you fool the electronics by sticking a micro-filter in the line.
All the handsets (3) throughout the house are BT wired units (2 x Decor, 1 x Duet) and the broadband line is FTTC.
How long have they been developing this system ?
I’ll be re-introducing the C-Tek units for upstairs, when I get a nano-second free, plugging the C-Tek “Base station” into the Hub’s green telephone socket, together with the downstairs handset. Technically, this might contravene the maximum Ren number rating requirement for DV sockets, but in a single person household . . how many handsets can you use at once ?
If you have wired house extension sockets it’s perfectly possible to rewire them to plug into the telephone socket on the router, this video will show you how to do it:- https://youtu.be/Id_KGXMcJHk?list=PLexbWs0Wp_H6LvKLZ6n5fyUknvlMag-Su&t=5
Cheers. Great video.
Yup, I guess the crackle on the BT Digital Voice Adapters is down to interference from local mobile phone repeaters. I understand they use the 1805.1 to 1880 Mhz frequencies (Bands B3, n3) and the BT Digital Voice Adapters use 1.88 to 1.90 Mhz (Ditto the C-Teks)and my home location, being NW London suburbs, has two mobile masts within 500 metres and a further 27 with 1 km (And 555 within 5km !).
Wired extensions seem like a good idea. I had those laid in a wired extension originally but that got crackly, a break, I think. I’ll just have to renew the wire in the extension.
A Faraday cage and military grade wiring might be a good idea too !
At the risk of being called a “fanboy” or “BT shareholder”:
Can’t speak for the DECT adaptors, but both the supplied DECT handsets and the phones I have plugged into the back of my BT hub work absolutely fine and sound better than the PSTN line it replaced. Especially when using the handsets as you can get “HD voice” if both ends of the call permit it.
As has been said, hard wiring the extensions would be infinitely preferable if you can do so.
Just noticed that the unit of measurement I stated for the DECT phones is wrong . . it should be GHz rather than Mhz. Hence the frequency conflict.
The majority of people are getting rid of their home phones these days, I have had VoIP for years, got it when I changed to a wireless network, mainly for my Dad to phone me, one I changed back to fixed line broadband I kept it as people knows the number, It don’t cost me anything if I don’t use it. I think I have a fiver left in it. I use sipgate
I did think about scrapping it. but again, there are still some people that has the number, like the NHS. I have some very old BT Synergy phones, I need to replace the batteries in some of them
I can understand people keep their home phones if they have naff mobile signal and their mobile phone or mobile network don’t support Wi-Fi calling or they have people who will only call their home phone.
fantastic news the empire is falling
When will they all wake up, Alt Nets can’t survive, once they haves used loans and investors money there is no business case. ROI is 50 years, the products alt net are putting in will need to be renewed, the records and documentation is wrong, the cheap prices they are offering run at a loss, go to companies house and take a look at the year on year spending and debt of Alt Nets.
Yawn. Another BT fanboy. Some ALTNETS will do fine, debt is always a factor as they didn’t have a generous tax payer funded network and infrastructure to begin with like BT. Virgin Media were in debt since the 80’s/90’s and still in business….
Virgin Media’s predecessors were in dire financial straits and it was only because of the generous provisions of American bankruptcy law that NTL and Telewest were able to break free of it.
It is actually good that you bring them up. The cable companies had everything rigged in their favour. BT couldn’t offer TV service or build a superior FTTP network, while the cable companies could compete freely on telephony. They still couldn’t make it work. The altnets have some favourable treatment (eg PIA, Openreach price controls) and they are struggling. How many times will we pretend that natural monopolies can have competition?
You are right, not all Alt nets will survive, some will merge and have already done so, we just have to wait and see. But this has been the same with over service providers for years.
Look at energy companies and how many have gone belly up.
But we got to try.
Look at the TV world, Sky ruled and knocked almost everything out, BSNB, Ondigital and Top up TV, the only thing that is still competing is cable and even that now belongs to Virgin and is no doubt why it can still keep going. Even sky is starting to lose out now with more people going for streaming packages, even the BBC is losing out to that.
The only thing that keeps Sky going is the sports channel, if they lost that silly game where people kick a ball around, then sky would go pop.
So yes we got to try and this is coming from someone who was hesitant to change from FTTC to an alt net FTTP service, because I was worried that they may go belly up and other things. I left the Openreach network years ago to go for a wireless network, sadly that went belly up, and I had to go back to Openreach, by that time FTTC had been installed around the city. One reason why I was a bit hesitant to change network again.
I am now glad I made the choice, apart from a few days of problems at the start, Zzoomm have been 100% reliable for me and I love the service. They have just merged with Full fibre, is that good or bad? I have no idea, but we will see what happens. It may make things better, at least people will have a choice of ISPs
We are having Nexfibre in the city next year by all accounts, they must think they can get customers here. I have no plans to move network to be honest, as long as the service I get is okay, and the price is okay, I don’t see the point in moving to another network. Myself, i think Nexfibre my struggle here, certainly by the time they come most people will have chosen either Zzoomm or Openreach network. But we will see.
As I said above, sometimes we have to try these things, if it falls apart, then that is the way it goes.
Virgin bought their assets in fire sales for pennies on the pound when the cable companies all went bust.
Virgin Media is two of those cable companies that went through debt restructuring. Result of ntl and Telewest merger, then acquired Virgin Mobile getting to use the name, was acquired by Liberty Global and lastly merged with O2 giving Telefonica 50% of the company.
ntl and Telewest nearly imploded due to huge debt burdens partly from overpaying for network assets. Dotcom bubble and all that.
@anonymous: Why are you obsessed with this “FanBoy” labelling?
The simple fact is that the AltNets, many of them at least, have no independent future and those that survive will have to transition to a sustainable model. It is a valid point to highlight the financial risks to end users.
Point: BT does not benefit from the heritage networks with the roll-out of FTTP, given that it is a cost burden and much would be surplus to the requirements of the FTTP infrastructure.
Fara82Light, you are a BT fan boy. Everything you say is positive spin towards BT. I’m really pleased that BTs legacy product GPON and expensive pricing ate doing it for you, but others like competition giving BT a hiding they absolutely need, and it’s starting to show, a little for now, but progressively worse over time.
You keep on with ALTNETS are all going bust, some might and some might consolidate a d others already cash positive on their expected and forecast accounts.
BT could damage ALTNETS by offering symmetric, but they don’t, simply because they don’t want the public to have it and want to rig everything their way with knee capped services. Even this so called trial of one tier being symmetric has horrendous unrealistic pricing which proves my point.
Personally it’s refreshing to see BT and VM getting kicked, long overdue…..
@Polish Poler, yes, I know the history of Virgin Media and how they got to where they are and what they grabbed hold off.
@Fara82Light, as for the Fanboy labelling, a lot of the people on here fits it, sorry, but they do. They seem to want altnets to fail and Openreach to b the only one.
If the Openreach network was non-profit or government owned, then I would say yes, but they are a business and BT which owns them are far too big and should have been split up years ago. Should not have one company owning the only network, whiohc is what many people are stiuck with.
I know some people here have share in BT, well they act as if they do and are not doing as good as they would like, but that is just bad luck, they take the risk.
I think it is great that people have more choice of networks, I tried to get off Openreach years ago onto a wireless network, sadly it did not work out, but that is the way it goes.
What happens in the future, we will have to wait and see,
@anonymous:
Your labelling, like many of your comments, are less than mature. The real world is rather governed by facts, not your invented takes on the world.
@Ad47uk:
There is no justification for labelling others. Some may fit your take on the world, but that is just your take. If you disagree with someone’s point of view, express your point of view; do not engage in attacks.
Further, it is not about wanting the AltNets to fail; it is about the current status of the market and what has happened in such markets in the past when funding of market share acquisition runs out, leaving too many players in a market, most of whom are too small to survive.
If Openreach were in government control, it would be subject to budget spending strains. As such, under the current government, the FTTP and 5g projects would have had their funding cut in half (as per the funding of the wireless not-spots), and we would be in line for another two to three-year pause. If in doubt, take a look at what happened to the railways after nationalisation.
I would also suggest you do not know that other commentators hold shares in BT, or that some have a financial interest in the success of the AltNets or other major players in the sector.
@Fara82Light
If you don’t want to be labeled, then stop acting as if you are a fanboy, and you love BT/Openreach, the same with a lot on here, it is no wonder that people like myself think you have a financial interest in BT.
Disagreeing is fine, but when you seem to want companies to fail, it looks like you have a financial interest in the company that will benefit.
Myself, I don’t have any financial interests in any companies, apart from maybe those that my pension is linked with, and I have no idea what they are. The company I work for, I do, because they pay my wages and that is it, it is a job, I go in, do my work, go home. I don’t even buy from them that often.
I have got no financial interest in Zzoomm, they gave me a good offer at the time. plusnet was pushing me to FTTP and 24 month contracts. so i though, if I had to go to FTTP, then go for a better network, that had a better contract, in 12 months, not 24 months.
We will see how it works out.
To be honest, if I did not have to have broadband, I would get rid of it and not bother.
@Ad47uk: Labelling individuals with derogatory terms is both abusive and immature. There is no justification for it when discussing a topic.
Further, I have no interest in seeing businesses fail, I am just focused on the numbers.
‘the only thing that is still competing is cable and even that now belongs to Virgin and is no doubt why it can still keep going.’
‘@Polish Poler, yes, I know the history of Virgin Media and how they got to where they are and what they grabbed hold off.’
Then you’ll know that Virgin Media don’t belong to ‘Virgin’ and never have. I was responding to 125us though.
Just a reminder.
June 2016: “BT Openreach’s boss Clive Selley has hit out at criticism that the network is failing to invest in ultrafast broadband lines, saying “it’s a mug’s game” to focus purely on fibre-optic technology…”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/15/openreach-boss-clive-selley-defends-broadband-roll-out/
Good job the Altnets started building fibre thereby forcing BT to abandon their “sweat the copper asset” strategy or we’d be even furhter behind the rest of the world.
We’re not behind the rest of the world. We’re about average for Europe and in the top 20% globally. We’re far ahead of places like Germany and the USA.
There are only two kinds of financial analysts. Those that don’t know what they are talking about and those that don’t know that they don’t know what they are talking about.
UBS advised ‘sell’ on BT in April last year at 105p per share. Today they advise ‘sell’ at 165p per share.
Following UBS advice last year would have cost investors a few bob.
If they are kicking the can down the road across the country like they are around here it’s no surprise people are leaving.
FTTP has been coming soon for over 5 years and the latest estimate is about to pass once again.
VM has become available in that time and OR still haven’t managed to get their act together and roll out FTTP.
Do you know how long it takes to build infrastructure? Openreach are the quickest builder in Europe…
Businesses are all going FTTP and more and more are moving to Ethernet leased lines. Multiple isdn, adsl lines are no longer needed.
ISDN and DSL have to go anyway when PSTN is switched off. FTTC will be around for a long time but SOGEA will provide small business customers with broadband and VoIP with large businesses probably opting for SIP Trunking.
FTTC is DSL. VDSL.
If you’re referring to ADSL there’s no reason PSTN closure leads to its withdrawal. The copper closure and exchange closure programme will eventually cause it to be withdrawn but ADSL has no dependency on PSTN to work.
OR should start changing old legacy GPON ONT to XS-PON to compete with AltNets like Community Fibre in London.
CommunityFibre does not seem to be attracting sufficient numbers in London despite offering higher spec packages..
I am not surprised they are losing connections. They can only offer me 67Mbps whereas Hyperoptic can do 1Gb.
Actually, in SW London I see so many CF installs, long may they continue. Even Hyperoptic has started to sell here, so the competition must be bringing in more customers.
The Openreach 2024 statement states that they lost 491,000 broadband lines in 2024, not 717,000 (net as opposed to absolute maybe?) Either way it would be odd for this amount to increase with another 4 million FTTP builds since last year and increasing FTTP take-up.
Who really knows how CF and Hyperoptic are doing in London, I see so many people in SW London and in w London taking their services.
EE Store are showing the BT SmartHub 2 as being both out of stock and unavailable saying this means the product has likely been discontinued by the manufacturer.
It will mean BT/EE will have to support other routers until they arrange new replacements for routers nearing end of life or when upgrading from FTTC to FTTP.