INCA Oppose Ofcom UK Proposals on Openreach Wholesale Broadband Pricing
The Independent Networks Co-operative Association (INCA), which represents many of the UK’s alternative broadband networks, has today warned Ofcom “not to relinquish statutory price regulation” on Openreach via recently proposed changes (here) to their Wholesale Local Access (WLA) pricing remedies under the 5-yearly Telecoms Access Review 2026 (TAR).
Just to recap. The regulator recently proposed an alternative approach to setting charge controls for Openreach’s regulated 80Mbps broadband product. “Openreach has suggested that, rather than Ofcom imposing charge control regulations on its 80/20 product, they instead amend their contracts with customers to achieve the same outcome,” said Ofcom, which views the proposal as being “likely to achieve similar outcomes to the charge control and therefore could be a more proportionate way of meeting our objectives.”
However, INCA is naturally wary of any change that would relinquish statutory price regulation in favour of relying on Openreach’s private contractual mechanisms, which they claim “amounts to the regulator stepping back from its duty to enforce fair pricing and support competition in the UK broadband market“. But Ofcom contends that the outcome for consumers and ISPs would be similar to the regulated approach.
Advertisement
Nevertheless, INCA believes this shift would reduce regulatory certainty, as “contract-based mechanisms are not directly enforceable by Ofcom in the way statutory price controls are“. But Ofcom’s consultation stated that Openreach would have “no ability to unilaterally change” the conditions during Ofcom’s 5-year market review period, until 2031.
Paddy Paddison, Chief Executive of INCA, said:
“This proposal asks the entire market to place trust in the incumbent. BT Openreach has no incentive to promote competition, yet Ofcom appears willing to rely on a contract-led workaround rather than the statutory powers designed to protect consumers and ensure a level playing field.
INCA also notes a broader pattern in recent consultations, where major changes have been introduced late in the process based largely on submissions from the incumbent operator. INCA believes that such late-stage adjustments, without adequate time for industry scrutiny, risk creating unnecessary uncertainty for investors and operators.
INCA has further highlighted concerns about the cashflow effects of Equinox’s quarterly refund structure, which requires operators to carry costs for several months before discounts are applied – an arrangement that can disproportionately impact Altnets.
Our intention is to work constructively with Ofcom. We want to ensure that any new approach supports competition, continued investment and strong consumer outcomes that Altnets provide.”
Ofcom has yet to make a final decision on what approach they will take, but the outcome is expected to be revealed alongside their final TAR statement in March 2026.
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 person's 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.
They would. However, the sector would perform better if it were deregulated and the market was allowed to set the prices.
Not really. Openreach would squeeze everyone else out of business thanks to their lower build costs, deeper pockets and economies of scale then charge as much as they could. It’s a natural monopoly and they owe it to their shareholders to maximise profit: that’d be the optimal way to do so.
Openreach have no kind of monopoly on FTTP. They have significant market power but then so do VM.
@Polish Poler:
Openreach would be able to lower its prices, and that would trigger a shakeout, but well-managed companies with sustainable business models would survive.
I’d pay slightly more attention to anything INCA have to say if they didn’t repeatedly insist on using the name “BT Openreach” – which that organisation has never been called. I know why they’re doing it and it is childish.
I will repeat my call for an actual “level playing field” – ie the altnets building their own physical networks, just like Openreach did (1984 need not reply; post privatisation investments are included in PIA), and Openreach being allowed to charge whatever they want, just like the altnets can.
But we know INCA wouldn’t be happy even if Openreach not only had to offer free access but they had to run the fibre (free of charge) for their members too.
Openreach was called BT OPENREACH and has BT branding until 2017 when OFCOM got BT to seperate openreach from BT
BT Group do still own openreach even though it is a legal seperate company to BT
and openreach do not own any network assets BT still own these
It wasn’t called “BT Openreach” even then, Paul. The most generous interpretation would be “Openreach, a BT Group business” as that actually was on the logo. But not “BT Openreach”.
The BT Group owns Openreach, but Openreach has separate management and other arms of the BT Group do not get special treatment when dealing with it.
So for INCA to repeatedly call it “BT Openreach”, to imply otherwise, is nonsense.
At this point Can’t INCA bugger off why Can’t Us Openreach fttp customers get cheaper Deals because Inca thinks this is uncompetitive Like come on What about The Areas that only has Openreach FTTP Talk about INCA Being uncompetitive
Without regulation, Jiddish, Openreach could charge different prices depending on competition in the area. Really low prices to win CP customers and put altnets out of business where it’s competitive, rinse people like you in Openreach-only areas to help compensate then rinse everyone once there’s no competition. That’s not what they could do, it’s what they should do to maximise profit for their shareholders if there’s nothing stopping them.
As a former BT and then Openreach employee I can confirm that Openreach was never called or referred to as BT Openreach. Ivor’s comment regarding the early Openreach logo “Openreach, a BT Group business” is correct and when introducing ourselves to customers we included “from Openreach on behalf of your service provider”.