INCA Calls for Clarity from Openreach on Which UK Homes Won’t Get Full Fibre
The Independent Networks Co-operative Association (INCA), which represents many of the UK’s alternative broadband networks, has today called on incumbent network operator Openreach (BT) to clarify which homes it’s likely to sacrifice if they carry out their threat to scale-back the deployment of full fibre (FTTP) broadband. The altnets will then know where to target.
The issue centres on last week’s comments from Openreach’s CEO, Clive Selley, who warned both the Government and Ofcom (here) that he was “going to hold fire” on seeking approval for the final phase of the operator’s plan to expand full fibre gigabit broadband beyond their current 25 million premises target for December 2026 (i.e. the goal to expand FTTP up to 30 million premises by 2030); at least until the regulatory and tax environment showed themselves to be favourable.
Selley’s warning was clearly issued with a view to the threat from both rising business rates and Ofcom’s forthcoming market review (i.e. the desire for softer regulation given today’s more competitive environment). However, any reduction in their deployment would naturally hit rural areas the hardest, since those are often the last to benefit from such upgrades.
Advertisement
The CEO of INCA, Paddy Paddison, has now followed Gigaclear’s earlier remarks (here) by calling upon Openreach to be transparent about which homes it claims it cannot invest in so that altnets can carry the can and bring forward their own business cases without fear of overbuild; something that their investors would very much welcome.
Paddy Paddison, Chief Executive of INCA, said:
“Openreach’s problem isn’t regulation – it’s competition. Nearly a million customers a year are choosing Altnets over the tired old network operator because they offer better products, better value, and better service. That’s what a functioning market looks like.
Investors are backing Altnets because they see innovation and delivery, not dependency on regulatory favours. The danger is that Ofcom confuses BT’s investment interests with the UK’s investment interests. The success of the broadband rollout depends on maintaining competition, not cushioning the incumbent.
Openreach’s threats to reduce investment say more about its struggle to compete than about the regulatory framework itself. The best way to serve consumers and investors alike is to protect the diversity of networks that are already driving real progress.
If Openreach cannot compete on a fair playing field for all, the regulator should not be forced to help them out. Last time Openreach refused to invest, it opened the door to Altnet investment, a move that has since delivered more than 16 million full-fibre homes across the UK.”
The response is a useful way for altnets to remind people – as well as the incumbent itself – that this isn’t a completely Openreach dominated market any more and if the incumbent steps back, then they could step in. On the other hand, there are currently only a few altnets with a strong rural focus and many of those have recently had to scale-back their own build plans and cut jobs, due to the pressures from high interest rates, rising build costs and a highly competitive environment (here and here).
Suffice to say that it’s currently unclear how many altnets would have the drive, funding and scale needed to completely fill any big holes that may be left by an Openreach retreat. At the same time, it remains unclear whether Openreach will actually scale-back their infrastructure deployment plans or are merely applying pressure to help focus minds in their desired direction of travel.
INCA added that they would also be writing to both the Government and Ofcom to set out their concerns and to seek assurances that the UK’s regulatory framework will continue to promote investment, competition, and consumer choice.
Advertisement
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.
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 and display names can be almost anything you like (provided they do not contain offensive language or impersonate a real persons legal name). 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.
Paddy Paddison hits the nail on the head:
“Nearly a million customers a year are choosing Altnets over the tired old network operator because they offer better products, better value, and better service. That’s what a functioning market looks like.
Investors are backing Altnets because they see innovation and delivery, not dependency on regulatory favours. The danger is that Ofcom confuses BT’s investment interests with the UK’s investment interest”
Openreach wants a more free market, the opposite of regulatory favours
as a guess most are from areas where theres no openreach full fibre, hence the alt nets built there in the 1st place. its a no brainer to go from 50mb, 3mb etc etc or less to 900mb for £25pm ( some are less £ some are more £ pm)
INCA publicly attempting to contravene the non-compete agreements prohibition contained within The Competition Act there. I mean, full points for chutzpah, fewer points for running these things past lawyers before doing your press release.
Threats are just that – threats. If Selley thinks Openreach can afford to abandon the field potentially leaving the field open to other players then that’s up to them.
I suspect people choose altnets almost exclusively on one metric – price – for which there isn’t even remotely a “free market” or a “fair playing field” as both BT and Openreach pricing is heavily restricted. Is he saying he wants Openreach’s shackles to be removed – if so, excellent, let’s crack on.
I assume by the 16 mil that they’re taking credit for Openreach’s fibre rollout, and I’m sure altnets did help move things along, but the relative failure of G.fast would have forced it to happen at some point. Openreach still had large chunks of the country on FTTP even before that, mostly in Cornwall, Wales and NI.
What’s “diverse” about a horde of altnets all offering largely identical services and unsustainable business plans built on the assumption that Openreach won’t be permitted to respond, and will be forced to rent its crown jewels to its competitors at knockdown prices? A “fair playing field” indeed.
the difference here is between Urban and Rural, or between “customers per mile” versus “miles per customer”
you have got ONE guess as to which of those it is that they would like to leave behind.
If INCA members want the benefit of such information, then there has to be a wider competitive benefit.
I would suggest that any network built by an INCA member into a Openreach declared “notspot” must be opened up to common carriage (so that others can resell the connection) using a regulated pricing model similar to what Openreach has had to offer.
And maybe also being tied to USO requirement, i.e. having to offer to build out notspots using a USO process and pricing similar to what Openreach has to offer (including “free connection if build costs under £3400 per customer). But at the 100mbs level please, not a 10mbs level.
“Periculum privatum utilitas publica” was the motto of the Stockton and Darlington railway 200 years ago, and I think the same could apply here.
Homes missed out by Openreach are likely to include individual scattered properties. It the same way that altnets miss those that are too expensive to connect.
one of the biggest problems is neither Altnets / Openreach really want to deal with the Elephant in the Room which is direct in Ground , Alnets happy to build PIA in where Duct and Poles exist, dont want to do anything that Direct in Ground — my own Premise is in this scenario . Altnet and Openreach 100M from my DID estate , alnet been there (100M away since 2022 , Openreach ahs just followed the alnet PIA — neither have done the DIG – — what covered not covered and why not covered is my area of expertise
If INCA really do believe Openreach’s problem isn’t regulation, why do they complain so much when Openreach offers discounted pricing through schemes like Equinox? I bet INCA would immediately have something to say if OFCOM lifted all the regulation holding Openreach down, they’d scream foul from the rooftops.
INCA’s commentary displays blatant double standards, which BT/Openreach can’t respond to since OFCOM jumps on them whenever they do respond in kind, remember what happened when Jansen made his end in tears comment?