The costs and timescales involved are vastly different.
BT Openreach effigy set alight by villagers
- Thread starter Fishbait
- Start date
The costs and timescales involved are vastly different.
That's an argument for getting started, surely? The point people make seems to be that if Openreach were a completely separate entity and not part of the BT Group then Sky would invest, because then they wouldn't be funding an organisation that competes with them as far as retail offerings are concerned. But there's really no evidence for that - Sky have made no statements committing to any investment in such a scenario, and when opportunities have presented themselves to put networks together that aren't reliant on Openreach, Sky's name is missing from the list.
Their issue with Openreach isn't about how it's 'letting people down' - it's because they don't want to give money to BT, and they don't like the Ofcom-regulated prices preventing them from throwing their commercial weight around.
Their issue with Openreach isn't about how it's 'letting people down' - it's because they don't want to give money to BT, and they don't like the Ofcom-regulated prices preventing them from throwing their commercial weight around.
What business would like giving their primary competitor money every month, just to get customers away from them? The way it is at the moment customers never truly leave BT.
Re the bold part...
It was a complaint often tabled at the bidding process that the criteria used ensured *only* BT could meet the requirements. I can't verify that, but it's been said quite a lot. That the bidding process was heavily skewed in BT's favour, and practically ensured other providers couldn't be successful.
Let's be honest... BT is a still a monopoly, pretty much. It can throw its weight around and get any contract it desires to have.
I think we've run out of arguments about a separate Openreach being better for the country now. Sky dislike taking a wholesale service from a competitor of theirs, but not enough to actually do anything about it. That's why I find their input on this topic disingenuous - they're dressing up a purely self-interested commercial view as something altruistic.
Yes, they are a monopoly as far as the local loop is concerned - which is why they are so heavily regulated. I don't agree with Ofcom's regulatory approach because it's skewed towards creating false competition in the same way that energy companies compete, rather than encouraging real entrants into the market, but that's what we have. There's no point talking about how in an ideal world something different would have happened in 1984, the ship has sailed.
If the public funding bids were written so that only Openreach would win them due to some dodgy efforts by the parties involved then obviously that's a problem and people should show their evidence. If Openreach won because they were the only player who had a comprehensive fair access policy for all interested retail providers then surely that's better than limiting people in the areas where public funds were used to a single retail provider? Note that all of these contracts involved a level of investment matching from BT themselves, protected the public from any overspend due to unforeseen issues, but ensured that any under-spend was returned to the relevant awarding body. They also pay money back if takeup reaches a level where the development would have met commercial viability criteria. It's a good deal for the local authorities involved, because the alternative would likely to have been to not spend the money and not get anything.
Have you been able to look for something to support your claim that the vast majority of Openreach infrastructure projects have involved public funds?
Yes, it's called 'business' and in this case a 'private business' who has to answer to it's shareholders. If the competitors build their own network then that will be job sorted. I'm just wondering if those competitors will lay cable to all those rural and non-economic urban locations. What's your best guess?
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,114
I have family in Southgate, London, and they can't get above a 2Mb connection. I find that utter madness.
I'm not sure why people in London believe they are entitled to everything first. I realise they are used to having the lions share of the countries resources but still.......
Of course not, but then neither have Openreach without government subsidies. Billions of pounds of them. And there are still many places that don't have fibre and won't anytime soon either.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2...roadband-speed-europe-germany-spain-singapore
Britain is the sick man of Europe for internet speeds.
If that wasn't bad enough, we also pay more than most for what we get.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/sep/19/why-british-paying-more-than-europe-broadband
The complaint that started this thread off was the availability of fibre into a small village. Giving urban areas gigabit and leaving the rest of the country on ADSL would game the average speed stats quite nicely, but you probably wouldn't benefit in Cornwall.
Do you want coverage, or do you want the highest average speeds? You've discounted G.fast earlier in the thread because it only provides a significant boost to people within 200m of a cabinet, but it would make the average speed figures look better.
There's also a very large discrepancy between the report cited by the Guardian and probably the most popular speed test - http://www.speedtest.net/global-index. I am not sure all of it can be explained away by the fact that technically savvy people are more likely to use a speed test, and will more than likely have a fast connection.
Do you want coverage, or do you want the highest average speeds? You've discounted G.fast earlier in the thread because it only provides a significant boost to people within 200m of a cabinet, but it would make the average speed figures look better.
There's also a very large discrepancy between the report cited by the Guardian and probably the most popular speed test - http://www.speedtest.net/global-index. I am not sure all of it can be explained away by the fact that technically savvy people are more likely to use a speed test, and will more than likely have a fast connection.
I'm all for fibre because the copper/alu last mile is decaying and old.
Let me give you an example. My line is flaky as hell, and just about manages to hold an ADSL sync on a good day (no point in me upgrading to "fibre" broadband as the line just won't do it).
OpenReach came out twice to test the line. Both times the engineer said he didn't have the proper kit to run every kind of test and find every kind of fault. Both times they (predictably) couldn't find the fault on the line.
Then I got billed for £50 for their failure to find the fault. The line is still flaky as hell, and still struggles badly to keep the connection up.
OpenReach flat out failed me. My ISP flat out failed me and said they had to charge £50 as BT told them there was no fault. There blantanlty is a fault, but there's no point in trying to get OpenReach to fix it.
The old copper last mile is no longer fit for purpose. It was build decades and decades ago - by a state-owned BT as already mentioned - and now private BT/OpenReach don't want to maintiain it, but they still want to charge us to use it.
So G.Fast (and indeed VDSL) are no ****** use to me whatsoever. They need to get rid of the **** copper/alu lines that are now well beyond their sell by date. But they won't do that as they're pursuing ways of NOT rolling out FTTP for as long as they can help it. Hell, many places will flat out never get it. Ever.
I'm pinning my hopes on fixed wireless in the next decade. OpenReach just won't do **** if your line is bad. Plenty of people I know have had the exact same trouble. OpenReach won't fix faults, and love to add insult to injury by charging customers who report faults £50 a time. ***** useless company.
Let me give you an example. My line is flaky as hell, and just about manages to hold an ADSL sync on a good day (no point in me upgrading to "fibre" broadband as the line just won't do it).
OpenReach came out twice to test the line. Both times the engineer said he didn't have the proper kit to run every kind of test and find every kind of fault. Both times they (predictably) couldn't find the fault on the line.
Then I got billed for £50 for their failure to find the fault. The line is still flaky as hell, and still struggles badly to keep the connection up.
OpenReach flat out failed me. My ISP flat out failed me and said they had to charge £50 as BT told them there was no fault. There blantanlty is a fault, but there's no point in trying to get OpenReach to fix it.
The old copper last mile is no longer fit for purpose. It was build decades and decades ago - by a state-owned BT as already mentioned - and now private BT/OpenReach don't want to maintiain it, but they still want to charge us to use it.
So G.Fast (and indeed VDSL) are no ****** use to me whatsoever. They need to get rid of the **** copper/alu lines that are now well beyond their sell by date. But they won't do that as they're pursuing ways of NOT rolling out FTTP for as long as they can help it. Hell, many places will flat out never get it. Ever.
I'm pinning my hopes on fixed wireless in the next decade. OpenReach just won't do **** if your line is bad. Plenty of people I know have had the exact same trouble. OpenReach won't fix faults, and love to add insult to injury by charging customers who report faults £50 a time. ***** useless company.
I thought this was a discussion about strategy rather than individual cases? It sounds like you have a terrible line which should be fixed - presumably it's bad enough to cause voice quality problems at which point you can raise a voice fault. You shouldn't be getting charged for visits where no fault could be found and resolved on your side of the demarc, sounds like your provider has let you down here and needs to push back more.
Assuming your line wasn't faulty and you had FTTC available but you wanted something faster, who's responsibility do you think it should be to install fibre to your house when the payback period could conceivably never be reached? I understand you're annoyed with Openreach, they annoy me a lot as well, but I don't think anybody has proposed a workable alternative, they just assume that they are meant to have fast Internet and somebody else should be paying. Personally I am going to be making enquiries when the new FTTPoD pricing comes out in February and then make the decision based on the price that comes back whether to get it installed or not - but no part of me thinks it's somebody else's responsibility to pay for that.
Assuming your line wasn't faulty and you had FTTC available but you wanted something faster, who's responsibility do you think it should be to install fibre to your house when the payback period could conceivably never be reached? I understand you're annoyed with Openreach, they annoy me a lot as well, but I don't think anybody has proposed a workable alternative, they just assume that they are meant to have fast Internet and somebody else should be paying. Personally I am going to be making enquiries when the new FTTPoD pricing comes out in February and then make the decision based on the price that comes back whether to get it installed or not - but no part of me thinks it's somebody else's responsibility to pay for that.
"Assuming your line wasn't faulty"... no it *is* faulty. No ifs, no buts.
OpenReach will not fix it - they've had two attempts. My ISP have billed me £50 for the pleasure of being told there's no fault. The symptoms are consistent with a High Resistance fault I believe, and the wiring in our estate dates back to the 70s when the estate was built.
Whether I get continual drop-outs or not depends on the temperature outside. But that, apparently, is not a fault OpenReach feel inclined to fix.
It's not one or two people "getting annoyed" and making "unreasonable demands" of good old privatised OR/BT.
Have a look at their TrustPilot rating... 1 star
Have a look at the billions of forums posts indexed by Google where people are being charged £130 a time for the privilege of OR not fixing their issues.
Heck, OR have managed to turn their failures into a profitable money-making excersice!!! Where else what that be allowed? It goes like this: send a junior eng with insufficient kit, and give him a max callout time of 30 mins per job (the engineers told me candidly this was the case. Not only did they admit to not having all the kit they needed, like a TDR, but they said if they couldn't find the fault within 30 mins they had to report "no fault"). Then when your eng fails to find the fault, you MAKE MONEY. This is appalling! It should not be allowed? WTH are Offcom doing not looking into this?
OR are literally profiting from being useless.
OpenReach will not fix it - they've had two attempts. My ISP have billed me £50 for the pleasure of being told there's no fault. The symptoms are consistent with a High Resistance fault I believe, and the wiring in our estate dates back to the 70s when the estate was built.
Whether I get continual drop-outs or not depends on the temperature outside. But that, apparently, is not a fault OpenReach feel inclined to fix.
It's not one or two people "getting annoyed" and making "unreasonable demands" of good old privatised OR/BT.
Have a look at their TrustPilot rating... 1 star
Have a look at the billions of forums posts indexed by Google where people are being charged £130 a time for the privilege of OR not fixing their issues.Heck, OR have managed to turn their failures into a profitable money-making excersice!!! Where else what that be allowed? It goes like this: send a junior eng with insufficient kit, and give him a max callout time of 30 mins per job (the engineers told me candidly this was the case. Not only did they admit to not having all the kit they needed, like a TDR, but they said if they couldn't find the fault within 30 mins they had to report "no fault"). Then when your eng fails to find the fault, you MAKE MONEY. This is appalling! It should not be allowed? WTH are Offcom doing not looking into this?
OR are literally profiting from being useless.
Did you actually take your complaints about being charged to not fix faults anywhere, or just get ranty on a forum? Apologies for any offense caused, but the way you've gone in to full-on angry mode doesn't give me the impression that you've explored all the avenues here. I'll grant you that in an ideal world you shouldn't have to, but sometimes it helps to know how to play the system. Just bear in mind your contract is with your ISP (who may or may not also be your phone line provider), not with Openreach. It's your provider that passed on the charges to you rather than pushing back.
Maybe change provider temporarily until they resolve the problem for you - the guy who started Andrews & Arnold is quite open about the fact that he doesn't mind if people move to them on a short-term contract, use that period to hammer Openreach into resolving line faults, and then migrate away to somebody else, though they hope that you'd stick around should you find the service to be good. I have seen lines replaced for faults if that is the way to fix it, so I wouldn't totally give up hope yet.
Maybe change provider temporarily until they resolve the problem for you - the guy who started Andrews & Arnold is quite open about the fact that he doesn't mind if people move to them on a short-term contract, use that period to hammer Openreach into resolving line faults, and then migrate away to somebody else, though they hope that you'd stick around should you find the service to be good. I have seen lines replaced for faults if that is the way to fix it, so I wouldn't totally give up hope yet.
I took it as far as I could, but as OR weren't interested and my ISP wasn't interested, there didn't appear to be anything I could do. ISP blamed OR and said there was nothing they could do if OR told them there is no fault. As far as they were concerned, it was "case closed".
OR send two engineers with strict 30 min time windows and no proper kit. Both seemed terrified of staying at my place for any longer than 30 mins (I was nice as pie to them) because OR would discipline them if they did.
Hardly seems conducive to actually finding and resolving issues, if you don't allow your engineers any time (or kit) to do their job. Having seen all this, I concluded after the 2nd callout that it was an exercise in futility, and I will admit I gave up. Probably what both OR and my ISP wanted me to do.
OR send two engineers with strict 30 min time windows and no proper kit. Both seemed terrified of staying at my place for any longer than 30 mins (I was nice as pie to them) because OR would discipline them if they did.
Hardly seems conducive to actually finding and resolving issues, if you don't allow your engineers any time (or kit) to do their job. Having seen all this, I concluded after the 2nd callout that it was an exercise in futility, and I will admit I gave up. Probably what both OR and my ISP wanted me to do.
Have you actually tried upgrading to FTTC rather than just ranting online about how unfair everything is?
With a much shorter copper loop you may well find your problem goes away - if there is a fault on the E side it won't affect a FTTC connection.
Oh lol you’ve not even attempted an upgrade. Yeah sorry, you’re ranting about how poorly a hypothetical problem might be handled now.
Why do you think you’d be charged if the service doesn’t work? You can complain about customer service all you want but at some point you do have to be prepared to stand up for your rights as a consumer.
Why do you think you’d be charged if the service doesn’t work? You can complain about customer service all you want but at some point you do have to be prepared to stand up for your rights as a consumer.