Skip Navigation

Global broadband connections reach 445 million
Tuesday 08 September 2009 16:05:58 by John Hunt

The Broadband Forum has today announced the latest broadband statistics (based on figures from Point Topic) covering the period Q2 2009 (April-June) which shows growth of 12.9 million broadband lines bringing the total to 445 million. IPTV also saw 11% growth bringing numbers to 26.9 million with a substantial 54% increase in the Asian market to nearly 3 million subscribers.

Growth has slowed in some regions- Western Europe continuing to fall from 4.11% growth in Q1 2008 to just 1.64% in Q2 2009. Most regions also have a decline in growth based on figures from the last quarter although Eastern Europe and Asia-Pacific are bucking the trend with growth increasing.

The league table of top 10 broadband countries, which make up over 70% of all broadband connections, ranks the UK as 6th, no change from Q1 2009, with 17.8 million broadband connections. China is edging ever closer to the 100 million mark at 93.5 million subscribers, a 23% increase from last years figures.

Country Q2 2008 Q2 2009
China 75,768,350 93,549,000
USA 74,440,195 86,227,582
Japan 29,584,700 31,085,500
Germany 21,420,702 24,086,250
France 16,601,286 18,324,300
UK 16,718,400 17,838,200
South Korea 15,061,659 15,876,992
Italy 11,534,230 12,855,463
Brazil 8,490,400 10,469,755
Canada 9,005,181 9,618,107

Number of broadband connections ranked by country

In terms of access technology, DSL maintains it's dominant position with 64% of the market, cable at 21%, fibre 13% and Wireless and Satellite/Other each having 1%. The growth of IPTV services is demanding higher bandwidth broadband, increasing the demand for fibre based access services.

"This report shows that, while broadband adoption is not immune from the state of the world economy, the technology continues to move forward and I believe this year has shown that broadband expansion is not limited to the top industrialized countries, but is a key factor in assisting developing nations to gain a foothold in today's tough market.

"The Forum continues to drive broadband innovation, and with our latest work around IPTV network and service assurance, we continue to ensure that the industry has all the tools and specifications it needs to optimize networks and to capture the full potential of broadband and IPTV worldwide. We have also undertaken several initiatives in areas such as energy efficiency this year, which will help facilitate network energy savings as broadband growth continues across the world."

George Dobrowski, (Chairman and President) Broadband Forum


Posted by cyberdoyle over 8 years ago
UK may be 6th in this table, but the majority of UK connections are less than 2 meg through obsolete copper phone lines, which is hardly broadband in this day and age when other countries are getting gigabit connections through fibre. The table shows how important broadband is becoming to people in this country, and should pave the way for investment in getting fibre to every home, instead of paying fatcat wages or shareholders. Think to the future generations instead of the present profits. Don't kill the golden goose before it lays the eggs to bring recovery to the UK economy.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
The UK has a higher average connection speed than America, and is lower than other countries simply because of the way it offers connections to people in our extensive urban sprawl.

Despite the efforts of certain people to pretend that FTTH is viable outside new builds, grossly inadequate existing infrastructure (only true in the UK in Hull) or government funding, there are no examples of such.

Thinking about future generations means not rushing into poorly designed "fibre" setups which are not future-proof simply because they're using a magic word.
Posted by Dixinormous over 8 years ago
I disagree that majority of connections are less than 2Mbit.

I also disagree with Dawn, using our higher average speed than the US as a demo of how great we are then using our 'extensive urban sprawl' as an excuse for underperforming. It's not an excuse, BT not having any RDSLAMs is the issue there, despite the efforts of certain people to convince us that BT are great and good and do no wrong.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Well, name the people who are saying that about BT.

I certainly don't think that, but I don't see anyone stepping up to replace BT either, and I don't think they should bankrupt themselves trying to get FTTH with no government support.

Urban Sprawl isn't an excuse either, it's a fact of life we have to deal with the UK.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
And face it, RDSLAMs are an expensive stopgap. FTTC will do the same, but far more effectively - typically they're only deployed for very remote communities of the sort the UK has only a few, because of their expense.

Besides, you were pissing off abroad, it's not like you have a stake in this anymore.
Posted by Dixinormous over 8 years ago
RDSLAMs are not an expensive stopgap deployed in remote communities they are deployed extensively in a number of countries. Immediately coming to mind are Canada and Australia. Neither a glowing light of internet access though.

RDSLAM == FTTC so not sure why it's an expensive stopgap while FTTC is more effective but hey...
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Well yes, and their average line lenght is higher, because of the nature of their urban concentrations.

The technologies as-deployed are not identical either, for all that they are very close in concept.
Posted by ElBobbo over 8 years ago
Semantics. In an FTTC network, the premises are connected by a DSL loop to a DSLAM (Digital Subscriber Line Access Muxer) at the cabinet. If the DSLAM is not located in the exchange, then it's an RDSLAM (Remote DSLAM).

Have you noticed that whenever it comes to investing, the current business solution seems to be "as little as we can get away with". Bloody beancounters.
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
the majority of connections may well be round the 2mbit mark. Not because of poor copper loops (the average is nearer 4.5mbit) but because a lot of VM customers are on 2mbit and a lot of sky customers are also on 2mbit, then add the rate adaptive customers that synch at 2meg or below and it probably does add up to a sizeable chunk.
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
A list of broadband connections by country must be the most useless table ever.

So China has the most..
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
ElBobbo - Technically, yes. How products are actually designed and marketed, no.

And if if was "as little as we could get away with", FTTC would certainly not be on the agenda!
Posted by ElBobbo over 8 years ago
FTTC has to be on the agenda, otherwise people compare BT's product (24Mbit max, only because they've been pushed) to Virgin's (50Mbit), and finds it lacking. Joe Bloggs doesn't care about anything but headline speeds and cost.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Pushed? When it became possible for them to feasibly offer it, they have.

And Joe Blogs isn't expanding VM's market share because of their high turnover...the bad service is quite evident to him.
Posted by ElBobbo over 8 years ago
Oh yeah, Virgin's losing market share left and right:
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago

Please try harder.
Posted by ElBobbo over 8 years ago
So VM's competing with BT and VM's actually had to pay for their infrastructure. If you work for the PR side of BT they really ought to fire you.
Posted by ElBobbo over 8 years ago
Your link is out of date, by the way, which is pretty amusing given it's the only time you've ever volunteered anything quantitative.
Posted by AndrueC over 8 years ago
@ElBobby:"VM's actually had to pay for their infrastructure" - not yet they haven't.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
The link works fine, stop using IE5.

And it's amusing you haven't read it given it's a recent link on this site.
Posted by Dixinormous over 8 years ago
VM don't have high customer turnover Dawn, do try actually reading their results and getting some facts before trotting out your stories of how poor their service is and how huge their churn is.

I appreciate that you had a bad service, they dynamically modified traffic management just for you, etc, however they do not have this massive turnover of customers.

To quote you 'please try harder'. You can go find their annual report and churn figures to find how wrong you are yourself.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Mm hum. Their churn is not high for a general subscription business, but it is high for ISP's with 12 month contracts. Like to like comparion...

And I'm sure there are pills you could take for the voices that tell you that I've said that I never did.
Posted by mishminx over 8 years ago
How are we to invest instead of paying shareholders? Are we in Stalin's Russia now?
Posted by authoriseduser545 over 8 years ago
I can't even get cable TV, and I'm in central London.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.