Skip Navigation

Cumbria rejects tenders from both BT and Fujitsu
Thursday 14 June 2012 16:18:59 by Andrew Ferguson

Some have been saying that BT has Cumbria in the bag with respect to the counties BDUK project, but it seems the council has rebuffed the existing advances from both BT and Fujtisu with concerns over the amount of funding from the bidders and the ability to hit the 90% of homes and businesses having access to superfast broadband target for 2015.

The project represents some £40m of subsidy to the winning bidder, but whoever wins the bid is expected to closely match fund or exceed this amount. It is thought that the solution from Fujitsu will revolve around a full fibre to the premises roll-out, with fixed wireless for the most costly to reach areas, while BT is likely to relying on its usual mixture of full and partial fibre, plus smaller amounts of fixed wireless or satellite to cover the most remote areas.


Posted by Spectre_01 over 4 years ago
meh... all part of the negotiating process, neither side can be seen to be doing an easy deal.
Posted by tonypriest over 4 years ago
The link doesn't seem to work - for me. This seems to be ok
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 4 years ago
@tonypriest thanks for heads-up, have found updated article now.
Posted by desouzr over 4 years ago
North Yorkshire County Council are due to meet tomorrow and make an announcement next Tuesday about the Connecting North Yorkshire project. This news from Cumbria makes me worried about what will happen here. I can't take anymore delays. If they can't strike a deal after a 2 year procurement process what hope is there...
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Interesting, what if after the next round of talks both pull out?
Posted by Spectre_01 over 4 years ago
The Cumbria will have to use next generation high speed carrier pigeon.
Posted by nickkcin over 4 years ago
Well, as BT and Fujitsu are not signing the BDUK framework either, I can give you two guesses how the NYNET one will go.

BDUK are Ostriches.

When they realised that all the sensible companies were pulling out citing that it was biased in favour of BT and that no business case could be built (I expect the reason Fujitsu is having issues), they should have realised the whole process was flawed and started again and do it properly.

BT knows it is the only game in town and I expect it's negotiation stance is (predictably) arrogant.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Well if Fuji's bid is primarily based on FTTH I can see why the council will have kicked back. You don't even need to see the bids to work out that Fuji surely cannot rollout out the same amount of FTTP for the same cost as BT can rollout out FTTC/P ?
Posted by desouzr over 4 years ago
@nickkcin as the North Yorkshire project was one of the initial pilots it is not reliant on the framework agreement. However, I'm waiting to see what the latest position is from my contacts at NYCC and NYNET.
Posted by cyberdoyle over 4 years ago
Fujitsu could roll out fibre to digital parish pumps, where new businesses could build new networks to the rural people desperate for connections, which seems a better deal than giving slightly faster broadband to those who already have it from cabinets? As Rory Stewart pointed out, soft loans could help the altnets and provide much needed competition to an obsolete incumbent?
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
But is that their bid cyberdoyble, to do that?

I'm sure they could, but I'm not sure they would.
Posted by Somerset over 4 years ago
Any telco could put a link into a DPP location, it's the funding around that and beyond that needs specifying. Nobody wants a NextGenUs repeat.
Posted by Somerset over 4 years ago
So CD, why is FTTC obsolete?
Posted by Spectre_01 over 4 years ago
Its not in any real term, only by the idea that there are faster technologies available in a theoretical sense but not a practicable one.

When someone else rolls out a faster network on the same scale as BT's then it can be truly claimed that BT's FTTC is obsolete.
Posted by Spectre_01 over 4 years ago
*in the UK.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.