Hyperoptic Ends Campaign Against Mid-Contract Broadband Price Hikes
In a somewhat surprising development for an ISP that has spent the past few years campaigning against mid-contract price hikes. City-focused UK ISP Hyperoptic has this week refreshed the pricing of their broadband packages to adopt the same structure of annual price rises as many of the largest internet providers.
The operator, which at the start of this year suffered another round of redundancies and spoke about having their “target of 2m homes passed well within our sights” (here), officially claims to have so far deployed their alternative full fibre (FTTP/B) network to reach “more than” 1.73 million homes in parts of 64 towns and cities.
Regular readers will note that Hyperoptic has also spent much of the past few years actively campaigning to stop the practice of mid-contract price rises by rival broadband providers, which often increases consumer prices well above the current level of inflation.
Advertisement
Just to quote the provider’s previous Policy Director, James Fredrickson, from 2023 (here): “Millions of households across the UK are unknowingly locked into deals with inflation busting mid-contract price rises – and unable to leave that provider without paying hefty termination fees … At Hyperoptic we don’t do mid-contract price rises. We believe the price you see advertised should be the price you pay for the length of your contract.”
Similarly, Hyperoptic’s CEO, Dana Tobak, last year reiterated (here) how they’d “campaigned against unpredictable mid-contract price hikes for over two years” and expressed pride “on being in the corner of customers, offering hyper fair and transparent contracts with no mid-contract price hikes“.
So, when several readers this week informed ISPreview that the ISP had done a U-turn on this policy and introduced the same sort of mid-contract price rises as larger rivals, we were perhaps a touch surprised.
Lutfu Kitapci, CCO and MD of ISP at Hyperoptic, told ISPreview:
“For years, broadband consumers have had to deal with unknown price increases in the middle of their contract and we are proud to have campaigned and supported the ban of this unfair practice. Price changes however are not uncommon, for example after introductory pricing, discounted months and other offers. To remain competitive in the current environment, we will be introducing an annual increase of £3 from April 2026, for customer joining from 3rd June 2025.
Existing customers will not be affected by the annual increase, unless they switch to a new minimum term. Customers on the Fair Fibre plan will also not be affected by this change. We are confident that this move will help customers to make a fair comparison when choosing their next broadband provider.”
The change means that, for example, customers taking their top 1Gbps tier on a 24-month term will now pay £35 per month (plus a £19 one-off activation fee), albeit rising to £38 from April 2026 and then £41 from April 2027. In fairness, Hyperoptic has clearly signposted the change and the pricing remains attractive, but that doesn’t change the fact that this is still a bit of an embarrassing change, given their history on the subject.
Advertisement
Naturally there are still plenty of other ISPs out there to choose from and many of those still inhabit the same moral high ground as Hyperoptic once occupied. But sadly, Hyperoptic are the only ISP choice on their own specific network.
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.
« GoFibre Connect 500 Customers to FTTP Broadband in Barnard Castle
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.
Sad change of heart.
Since all the price increases are now known in “pounds and pence”, it would be easy for Hyperoptic and other ISPs to work out the average price that would be paid over the contract period (including setup fees). But of course they won’t, as that would be providing clear and transparent pricing that customers could directly compare.
How would they know in advance what the level of charges will be in any future year?
Because Ofcom now requires the price change to be defined up-front in pounds and pence — either a fixed rate (e.g. an annual increase to the monthly price of £3) or based on a percentage increase (e.g. if a monthly price of £35 will increase by 5% then the ISP must state that the price will increase by £1.75). Increases based on RPI, CPI, or some other index that might change after the customer signs up are banned for new contracts.
@Ben: Thanks, I had not digested the implications of the changed regulations on contracts.
my goodness, how the mighty have fallen.
Jokers. I’m glad there’s still some ISPs like Aquiss that don’t get involved in this nonsense (although they could stand to lower their OR pricing a little). Price should be the price for the contract.
Costs group every year. Businesses must be able to recover costs.
If businesses want the flexibility to be able to increase pricing in order to cover increased costs then they can mirror Aquiss’ approach and only offer a relatively short contract.
@Fara82Light Yes but really that’s the game they play they have to price their contracts accordingly for the duration otherwise what’s the point of a contract where one party can make changes but the other can’t. It’s ludicrous. Have a shorter contract if you are really unsure how much your costs will go up a year or two down the line or just price your contracts with some contingency. If I were to try and get work from my customers with terms like that where the price could change mid contract they would laugh, most renegotiate terms upon renewal and yet the comms industry it seems to be a law upon themselves where they can’t operate without being able to change your terms mid contract.
@Ben: They are effectively doing that now with the new model. They can get around the decoupling from inflation linked escalations by over-estimating cost inflation increases as done in other markets.
@ Gman: Yes, it was my mistake. I had not fully digested the implications of the Ofcom ruling.
@Gman: I would make the point that most business contracts allow for yearly price increases in relation to terms extending over multiple years. However, yes there is now an incentive for providers to move back to 12-month contracts.
The bombastic ‘we’re not like everyone else, we don’t put prices up’ marketing ploy of the challenger brands was always going to end – they all have investors who, having stuck a lot of money in to the ground, are now looking for returns.
This was always going to happen, and as the altnet market matures, their pricing will need to reflect their operating costs.
It’s not inevitable that they do this but I think the market needs some legislation as they’re unable to govern themselves properly. Nothing wrong with an ISP saying they need to make x amount over the life of a contract but to structure it as your price is only valid for the first year of potentially a multi year contract and then it will go up by an amount that may not even be defined in actual pound amounts up front is scumbaggery at its finest. Charge what you need to for the lifetime of the contract and just don’t change it until renewal, it’s not a lot to ask for but seems like the ISPs need to be forced to be consumer friendly.
Government legislation has disrupted the business plans of virtually every business in the land.
Well, this is a bit embarrassing. Imagine spending all that time and resource to fight a very public campaign for well over a year, presumably with the aim of building a consumer-friendly reputation, only to chuck it on the bonfire. To echo another commenter, why not just use a single price that already has the increase factored in? That way, presumably you get the same/similar revenue but *without* looking completely farcical.
That said, I wonder how many new customers will know/care enough about Hyperoptic’s history for this to affect whether to take the service? If I had to choose between 15Mbps and 900Mbps, “they changed their mind over pricing structures” wouldn’t be the deciding factor.
Thing they campaigned for actually happened. Now price rises need to be clearly stated in pounds and pence with exact schedule when they happen during the contract.
Now if Ofcom had regulated the market to open up all networks to ISP access, Hyperoptic customers would have the option to shop around for their ISP.
Probably forced on them by consumers who only look at the initial price when comparing ISPs. I don’t think there’s really any other reason for this pricing strategy. The regulator should be forcing ISPs to advertise prominently the average monthly price over the course of the contract not only the initial price and the price increment.
Agree. This ALTNET is an embarrassment to the others. After being vocal, they go and do this.
What’s BTs excuse for mid contract price increases though. Been around for decades longer with bigger customer base…..
The economy and financial realities have forced their hand. This Labour government has heaped extra costs on businesses even after promising in the campaigning that it would not.
That’s a really strange comment. They aren’t a social club, they are businesses competing with incumbents and each other. They aren’t some amorphous blob to be fanboyed over they are entirely separate, almost entirely capitalist entities there to make a return for their investors. What Hyperoptic do is utterly irrelevant to the rest besides to give them a possible competitive advantage where coverage overlaps.
I’m pretty sure Cuckoo made the exact same u-turn since they were consumed into the Giganet conglomerate, though they’ve covered up their tracks since…
As a former customer who was kicked off when they broke up with TalkTalk Business, it’s sad to see the challenger providers reveal their true colours but that’s business!
Disappointing. That said, Hyperoptic are still the only option I have for full fibre and it’s been extremely reliable so they could double their price and I’d still pay it (but please don’t).
This is pretty distasteful from HyperOptic. While I don’t appreciate other providers that raise their prices annually, they are faced with annual price hikes at the wholesale level on a per line basis from Openreach/CityFibre.
HyperOptic with their model doesn’t typically have “per line” wholesale price hikes as they really only use OR EAD circuits/PIA to connect buildings and cabinets (which do have annual price hikes but not nearly in the same magnitude as 100,000s of wholesale lines).
This is purely a profiteering move from HyperOptic, possibly feeling the pain of increasing competition. With packages starting at an intro price for a few months, then jumping up after that promotion ends, and now with annual price increases it’s going to get really confusing for consumers to compare providers’ offerings.
They don’t have staff, rents, utility bills, colocation fees, backhaul, transit, etc, to pay?
Should be absolutely rolling in profit.
The greed of telecom companies is unreal. How come in many other countries fibre is less than half the cost, with symmetrical speed and no annual price rises? I’ve come to the conclusion that in the UK many industries are taking advantage of us and squeezing our pockets constantly. How long can this last before our standard of living becomes untenable and the rich exercise more and more control over us? Back to medieval times…
Usually because they’re poorer than we are. There’s nothing exceptionally high about our pricing and the upload speed is totally irrelevant to the discussion over pricing, cost of living and our apparent reversion back to feudalism.
What a load of tosh – awful OFCOM regulation along usual Brit apologist mentality saying they have to do it etc.
They can simply advertise the actual average price over the minimum term like every other industry.
hyperoptic media team “hey guys the other isps are greedy for punishing loyal customers we are so much better please subscribe to our service!!”
internal meet “hey guys, how about we milk the cashcow a bit more and go back on our word?” “more money??? great idea!!!”
media team now “haha peasants cant believe you trusted us, of course we will milk you!!!”
Serious props for the few remaining honest companies still holding on and not punishing their customers for being loyal, especially in the face of a hostile government hellbent on taxing everything including the air
I do not think criticism of Hyperoptic is justified on this matter. All criticism should instead be addressed to the government, which has collapsed the economy in the space of three months of taking power.
I mean most people would say Labour are not doing a good job, but the economy is far from having collapsed so behave yourself.
Bottom line is, if this option is available to ISPs, sooner or later they all will take it. Thats business for you and in this case its entirely been decided by Hyperoptic, who decided they want to begin making more money from customers mid-contract instead of at renewal time.
I’m all for mid-contract price rises being banned by Ofcom, but until they do, ISPs will continue to take advantage.
@Darkstar: Employment costs, changes to taxation, energy costs, and additional regulation have all contributed to businesses scaling back. It is evident that the economy has collapsed when the tax revenues are no longer meeting projections – to the extent that additional taxes are now being planned, growth has collapsed almost to zero, recruitment has declined, businesses are shedding jobs and interest rates are at risk of rising with still more costs planned for businesses.
We have already seen the providers scale back their network expansions – even those funded via BDUK. Further, the take-up figures are not meeting expectations for any of the providers, and this is likely impacted by the prevailing economic conditions as well.
All of this has come about because of changes in government policy in the last year.
So it is not reasonable to blame the providers for having to adjust to the new economic and financial conditions, because if they did not, many would likely soon go out of business.
@Fara82Light Community Fibre, then 2nd largest altnet, announced its build freeze in November 2023. It was noticed that CityFibre, largest altnet, paused various builds nationwide in January 2024. Presumably that was the fault of the government that came into power in July 2024 as well?
@Polish Poler: That is true about Community Fibre, but then that was more likely linked to the business than outside factors. I do not class CityFibre as an AltNet – they have been a major player for some time – but yes, they took an early decision.
Nearly of them were in the same situation with overly optimistic take up forecasts, a high cash burn and a build that was too slow.
The damage was done before the last election. Aside from a bubble, the number of altnets had no chance of being sustainable, the inflation and resulting interest rate hikes from the Russian invasion of Ukraine brought the pain forward.
CityFibre contributed too by burning cash like crazy having borrowed so much. Investors soured on the sector as they saw the biggest borrower flounder despite their debt being at very low rates.
Builds slowed or froze before any policy intervention from present government. Can’t think of any off the top of my head that scaled back as a direct result of policy changes, all at least started slowing beforehand, basically when they realised their cash burn was unsustainable.
Not to say they’ve gotten it right or helped but to lay the blame on them for this is naked partisanship.
Most of the altnets had no chance and at least some were founded in the hope of a fairly quick flip. Very few ever had a sustainable business model and those that do it’s largely based around efficient build, operation and scaling rapidly or keeping it local and/or focused on the most careful cherry picking.
@Polish-Poler: The market and financial conditions were very different before the last election. It is this government’s policies that are responsible for the sharp downturn in the economy, hitting both the providers and their potential customers with additional costs that the Labour promised only a few months prior that it would not impose. We are yet to see the full impact of those extra costs until the end of the third quarter.
They also removed IPv6 from a friends building, he had a back and forth with them for more than a month. They replied that the switch that was replaced in his building doesn’t support IPv6. Its 2025 and they removed a feature instead of adding more.
That is not good, I hate this sticking prices up in a contract, that is one of the reason I went with ZZoomm, 12 month contracts, no price rises in contract. At the moment anyway.
Just been caught by this, in my renewal period now. The deal in the offer email made no mention of the April increases. The T&Cs (at time of writing) on the site are dated 20 March 2024, and I can’t see mention of these in-contract increases. So their sales team will be continually facing these grumbles until they are upfront about it.
Having read the explanations here, I am a bit more understanding. They need to get their site updated with a proper explainer IMO.
Just got fully burned by this on my renewal call this morning – like the previous commenter no sign of the price hike in the offer email, but it was mentioned in the rapid terms and conditions spiel at the end of the phone call. If I hadn’t picked up on it and asked further questions it wouldn’t have been made clear at all until after I received the confirmation email. It feels egregious to me that a contract price increase that is already more then 10% gets another near 10% hike towards the end – the timing setting them up to hike it a further 10% 2 months after that when I next come to the next annual review.
But the problem is what are my real options? I’m over a barrel since I can’t switch away super easily without moving to a different type of broadband network and incurring large cost and going onto month rolling has a crazy price attached to it. Basically strong armed into accepting this, which I did with a request that a complaint about the practice is lodged on my file (doubt it will be though, the poor sales associate couldn’t wait to be off the call with me!). It becomes a frog in boiling water problem for existing customers – how long until you jump out of the pot if they continue with these sorts of practices.