Skip Navigation


Pricing for Openreach 330 Mbps service announced
Tuesday 15 May 2012 09:36:20 by Andrew Ferguson

The date for when the new FTTP 330 Mbps product trial starts from Openreach has previously been announced as 11th June. The Openreach price lists have updated now to provide some pricing information, though it should be remembered these prices only cover getting the data from the home to the exchange where the data is handed over to BT Wholesale or your LLU provider. Crucially to ensure reasonable levels of early adoption there is an offer that will run from 11th June to 31st January 2013.

Prices as of 11th June 2012 (per month, ex VAT)
Product Standard Price Offer Price
Up to 330 Mbps / 20 Mbps £24.61 £15.61
Up to 330 Mbps / 30 Mbps £51.61 n/a

What jumps out immediately is the difference in the standard price between the 20 Mbps and 30 Mbps upload variants, an extra £27 a month to get the fastest upload speeds. The £80 activation still applies, which is actually very low considering previous reports were that each install including get the fibre the last few metres to the outside wall of a premise took around seven hours.

A big advantage to the full fibre service is that it removes any of the problems that can arise from radio frequency interference and the variability in the local loop speed that forms part of the 'up to' clause is removed. This does not remove the need for 'up to' in advertising, since the actual speeds users experience from their home to the data server in some distant data centre will still vary based on many factors.

Comments

Posted by ian9outof10 over 2 years ago
Double the price for 33% more upstream. Hmmm. Strange.
Posted by undecidedadrian over 2 years ago
I suppose at 30Mbps upload OR is concerned that people may start running their own webservers at home or that if you want to use your connection 24/7 as an uploading seed you will have to pay for it.

Well when the do launch FTTP on demand the base price for line rentel doesn't look too bad wonder how much the ISP's will put on top to compensate for bandwidth?
Posted by herdwick over 2 years ago
Does the 30M upload use a different splitter ratio I wonder. GPON is often asymmetric and the BT SIN shows the upload committed data rate to match the service rate whereas the rate for the downstream is much lower.
Posted by Going_Digital over 2 years ago
Just need the FTTP on demand product now, seems to have gone quiet on that front.
Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
Yeah that will be the worry, with these uploads speeds is enough to host a small/medium website without much bother.

And lots of p2p of course!
Posted by KevG123 over 2 years ago
Nice, about the same price as my 1Mb service then lol
Posted by awoodland over 2 years ago
a) That's not ISP prices so you're not comparing like for like b) Pricing is a delicate act, too low and there's no point rolling it out, too high and everyone sticks with what they've got to save money (so no point rolling it out).
Posted by camieabz over 2 years ago
I imagine hosting companies will suffer slightly once these speeds become standard. Most home users' websites won't need more than a few Meg upload speed.

WIth that in mind, I presume the latter price is both aimed at commercial use, and at discouraging file sharing unless paying for it.
Posted by PhilCoates over 2 years ago
WOW!!

Thats 220x my current speed.

Digital divide? More like digital chasm.
Posted by KarlAustin over 2 years ago
As a hosting company it doesn't worry me at all. Most users neither have the desire or technical ability to host their own website. What worries me more is those users that do attempt it, inevitably get hacked and then used to launch DoS attacks - Couple of users with 330 down is enough to take out a lot of websites by just downloading their complex pages constantly.
Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
That is value add of a hosting company then, they should employ techniques to quosh DDoS attacks, they are only going to become more widespread
Posted by Borisvon over 2 years ago
@philcoates beat you there its 329 faster than mine.. :)
Posted by rayvon over 2 years ago
This is good news for the many thousands struggling to get 1mb or less with no sign of it improving.
Posted by KevG123 over 2 years ago
I know its not got the ISP charge on top, but still....
Posted by irrelevant over 2 years ago
Based on those prices, it'd be cheaper to get two 20Mpps-up lines than one 30Mbps-up... It'll be interesting to see what ISP pricing turns out like.

Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
@rayvon - Got to start somewhere? Or should we not continue to develop new products until all are on say 20Mbps?
Posted by KarlAustin over 2 years ago
@GMAN99 - lol is all I can say to that. If it were that easy then DoS attacks would't pose a problem for the likes of Amazon etc.
Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
I know its not easy :) its easy to stop a DDOS attack itself, not so easy to distinguish real traffic from the DDoS traffic so genuine traffic can get through. Mitigation techniques are out there though, whether people like Amazon use them is another matter
Posted by KarlAustin over 2 years ago
That's like saying it's easy to stop people dying, "we'll kill everyone then no one else will die after that." You are not stopping a DoS attack if you block all traffic, you are doing the job the attackers wanted, it's implicit in stopping a DoS attack that the genuine traffic must get through.

Yes there are mitigation technique that the likes of Prolexic use, but even they can't stop the very largest attacks still. Amazon etc. lose $millions if they are down, so you can be pretty sure they are using what is available.
Posted by PhilCoates over 2 years ago
@GMAN99

....@rayvon - Got to start somewhere? Or should we not continue to develop new products until all are on say 20Mbps?....

No disrespect but this is hardly 'starting somewhere'. At speeds of >200 x that available to a significant minority this rubs salt in the wounds.

Yes I know there are other telecomms providers who could provide services in rural areas but don't, and BT/OR is a private enterprise etc etc

Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
I mean you have to start offering the service somewhere, or should they cap it just because it would upset others?

Do you think the Virgin media boffins had a meeting just before they launched their 100Mbps service and said "Hold on boys, this is a bit rough isn't it? Some people can only get 1Mbps, lets not bother?"

Its progress, ok only to a minority at the moment but it will expand with FTTP on demand, as for the rurals well they'll be moaning for a long time to come I'm afraid regardless of what happens in other areas.
Posted by undecidedadrian over 2 years ago
Given that FTTP on demand is promising to deliver to anywhere that has FTTC. So by 2014 66% of the country can have it is not a "significant minority".

The take up may be in the minoroty for it but it will be avaliable to the majoroty.
Posted by otester over 2 years ago
If you want a decent connection, move or stfu.
Posted by Alex121 over 2 years ago
They should make sure that everyone can get at-least 8mbps first. I am not even rural yet can only get 3mbps (lower during peak times).
Posted by themanstan over 2 years ago
"Everyone" is a term bandied around too much.
Not even with mains water is "everyone" connected...
Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
@Alex121 on ADSL? Not possible
Posted by awoodland over 2 years ago
@GMAN99 - sure it is possible, you just have to put a DSLAM on everyone's doorstep. If only there were some way of putting a DSLAM closer to the EU premises. Whilst we're at it we might as well roll out newer faster DSLAMs... (Sarcasm is directed at the "don't upgrade anywhere yet" crowd)
Posted by PhilCoates over 2 years ago
@otester

'...If you want a decent connection, move or stfu...'

What a mature and insightful comment from the resident intellectual.

What if someones residence in a rural situation is essential to keep, for example, an elderly relative out of a care home and as such save the taxpayers money? Move or stfu - what an indictment of our society you really are.
Posted by PhilCoates over 2 years ago
@Gman99

'...I mean you have to start offering the service somewhere, or should they cap it just because it would upset others?...'

Do rural businesses have less need of good infrastructure and internet connections than urban?
Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
Rural business can buy leased line/Ethernet deliveries just like city based businesses can
Posted by KarlAustin over 2 years ago
I love how everyone keeps banding "rural" about. There are many urban locations that aren't getting FTTC - take for example the centre of Sheffield and there are plenty of "rural" locations that are.

The green eyed monster should not stop progress.
Posted by vicdupreez over 2 years ago
I just wish they would upgrade all the exchanges to ADSL2+... I am VERY rural, however am 2.8km from my exchange. I get a 7Mb connection... If they upgrade my exchange to ADSL2+ I *should* be able to get "up to" 16meg down, and wish up... Should this not be done where they are able to do so?
Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
I know, its a ridiculous way to think Karl, if I can't have it you can't have it, I'm not surprised the country is in such a state with such a mindset
Posted by otester over 2 years ago
@PhilCoates

Maybe the populace should have thought about that before demanding artificial competition/low prices at the expense of coverage.
Posted by otester over 2 years ago
Cont.

I am against socialism so that elder would be paying for their own care or their kid(s) would.
Posted by fibrebunny over 2 years ago
More likely the kids would have asset stripped the old biddy and the state would be picking up the tab for care.

Either way if great aunt maude mildew mugger is loving it deep in the rurals then their will always be a trade-off when it comes to services.
Posted by otester over 2 years ago
@fibrebunny

How is the state going to 'pick up the tab' if their is no social policies?
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 2 years ago
Removed a comment due to the personal attack.

If people want to disagree, make it clear without resorting to derogatory or inflammatory comments.
Posted by uniquename over 2 years ago
@GMAN99
"Rural business can buy leased line/Ethernet deliveries just like city based businesses can".

Apart from the "rural" that has been dealt with, the point is that with the high FTTC/P speeds the "city-based" don't need to buy the hugely expensive ethernet/leased connections. Possibly one of the reasons many industrial estates aren't getting it!
Posted by Borisvon over 2 years ago
what depicts rural or suburban?
its mentioned a lot but can't seem to find a definitive answer?
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 2 years ago
"Urban areas contain 81 per cent of the population (42 million) but cover 21 per
cent of the land"

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=ons%20rural%20households%20in%20uk&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CGMQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ons.gov.uk%2Fons%2Frel%2Fregional-trends%2Fregional-trends%2Fno--43--2011-edition%2Frural-and-urban-areas--comparing-lives-using-rural-urban-classifications---news-release.pdf&ei=m56zT6fVJYnB0QWv1cGUCQ&usg=AFQjCNFW65udiFJlHu92loCOaV5wPN3RuA


Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
@uniquename indeed.

But that is a different argument, one where businesses are saying they want to pay residential rates to run their business connection.

Rural business can get good connections now if they pay what other businesses pay, but they don't want to.

Businesses will still use leased lines, serious businesses want guaranteed bandwidth, sla's and QoS. Smaller business I agree will flip to FTTC/FTTP without a doubt
Posted by prlzx over 2 years ago
If it's FTTP and no VDSL is involved, I'm wondering why retain the high asymmetry? Also can anyone do the math on how much upstream is used for ACKs when downloading at 300M+?

If 300Mbps of bandwidth is available surely 200/100 or 150/150 products would be far more attractive and useful?

I can only guess it's because that would risk cannibalising other dedicated fibre offerings that can cost tens of thousands per annum.
Posted by jtthedevil over 2 years ago
Hope all those saying 'move or stfu' (by the way how is this not inflammatory??) and those who agree with this position, are all living in the south east of England. Then, when your water runs out, you will of course just move to the north or Wales. Or perhaps you'll expect millions of pounds to be spent getting water to your location? Perhaps you could foot the bill yourself for a dedicated 'leased water line' direct to your premises.
Like it or not, the digital divide is widening at an ever increasing rate, the haves have more than they'll ever need, while the have nots get nothing.
Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
It is increasing you are right, and the only way to close that gap is government funding but so far what they have offered up is pitiful
Posted by otester over 2 years ago
@jtthedevil

Not all of the south is affected by drought :)
Posted by GMAN99 over 2 years ago
@prix, yep no reason why higher upload can't be provided but I guess it will be a future product as/when required. The vast majority still download more than they upload so I guess that is how it is tailored. Virgin Cable is capable of much higher upload speeds and has been for some time but they have yet to make big increases in the upload department either. Lets face it, 20/30Mbps up is still a lot.

I'd love 20Mbps down!!!
Posted by creakycopperline over 2 years ago
@andrew BT cronie site i see.
Posted by New_Londoner over 2 years ago
@jtthedevil
Another story references Ofcom data showing 63% of us have access to Superfast Broadband. This suggests the digital divide is shrinking, and that's before any of the BDUK money has made a difference.

Still a fair way to go, and I doubt whether 100% will be achieved any time soon, but definitely seems to be improving. Don't forget mains water, electrcity, gas etc don't reach 100% of the population either, and they've all been around a lot longer.
Posted by PhilCoates over 2 years ago
@otester

'...I am against socialism so that elder would be paying for their own care or their kid(s) would...'

So you think people should pay for their care but you don't think you should pay for your software and media?

Typical hypocrite.
Posted by creakycopperline over 2 years ago
So you think people should pay for their care but you don't think you should pay for your software and media?
I don't, pirate bay all the way!
@otester shouldn't you be at one of those Republican rallies? i suppose you hate the NHS aswell, caring for people for free.
Posted by otester over 2 years ago
@PhilCoates

Care is a physical commodity, IPR is a made up concept that only exists in the mind of man.
Posted by otester over 2 years ago
@creakycopperline

It's not free though, someone has to pay for it, 90% of the time being the upper/middle class.
Posted by creakycopperline over 2 years ago
@otester = middle class Snob!
so you think they don't tax the working class do you? get lost you right wing conservative cretin.
i'm sure you stayed silent when they bailed out your friends in the banks/casino
Posted by cyberdoyle over 2 years ago
Rural businesses can't get leased lines like urban ones do. They cost many thousands of pounds. I know. I got a few quotes...
Posted by cyberdoyle over 2 years ago
And I can't see fttp being much cheaper, they get you on the 'fixed costs' for putting the fibre to the premises.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.