Skip Navigation


BT costs fall out could delay BDUK projects further
Tuesday 02 October 2012 17:02:32 by Andrew Ferguson

In a two horse race, where one horses trainer has already said publicly they don't expect to enter all the races it should be no suprise to most people to see BT winning the BDUK/local authority contracs. With the sacking of a someone within the BDUK over the leaking of an internal discussion paper and its subsequent publication on blogs, the topic of BT and BDUK costs has gone more mainstream.

The discussion paper attempted to analyse the costs that BT was attributing to the projects, and how the firm was estimating costs based on how rural or urban an area was. In itself this is not unreasonable as costs such as connecting to mains power supplies will be different for every cabinet install, and costs for re-instating footpaths or other surfaces will vary.

The real shouting match is whether BT is over charging the local authorities with the Daily Telegraph wading into the battle, claiming that the firm is over charging by hundreds of millions of pounds. Which sounds pretty far fetched when the BDUK fund is a total of £530m, and with match funding from local authorities it is likely to reach a total of £1bn. Examples of quotes of £17,000 (generic rural) through to £30,000 (most remote areas) are given for street cabinets, which sounds a very large difference, but without actual installation costs it is hard to judge.

Is BT deliberately hiding installation costs and making them up? If they are it makes very little sense, since if they were able to install for a lower cost they could offer councils even higher coverage figures as more cabinets would be economically viable with the addition of the BDUK funding.

The existing commercial roll-out programme from Openreach gives some potential insight into the costs of cabinet installations. The £2.5 billion programme is meant to serve two-thirds of the UK, with around 10% of using full fibre FTTP we estimate that the cabinet programme accounts for £1.8bn of the project and the number of cabinets to be installed is in the region of 30,000 to 40,000, which gives a very crude estimate of £45,000 to £60,000 per cabinet. This of course includes the costs of building the Handover nodes in the exchanges, which will number around 1,500 to 1,800.

All along the BDUK projects have been touted as reducing the risk for the winning commercial operator and not a traditional council founded broadband project which leaves them liable for cost overruns. To this extent BT is almost matching the BDUK and council funding in areas already announced, which if they do win all the projects gives a nice round total of £2bn, which is pretty close to previous estimates for rolling out FTTC across the UK, which is often quoted as costing £5bn.

If one looks at another data source, that ignores any BT costings, which is a report on the Economics of Next Generation Access by the World Bank for European Competitive Telecommunication Association (ECTA).

Investment per home connected (in Euro), market share 50%, urban cluster, stand alone first mover
Network Type Country (price in €)
  Germany France Sweden Portugal Spain Italy
VDSL 457 not viable 352 218 254 433
PON FTTH 2,039 1,580 1,238 1,411 1,771 1,110
P2P FTTH 2,111 2,025 1,333 1,548 1,882 1,160

This data is for an urban cluster, so distance to central exchange should be shorter than rural areas, and issues like power are simpler to resolve. If we scale the prices to build a cabinet that can support 100 lines we see a price range of €21,800 in Portugal through to €45,700 in Germany. What is very interesting is that while Openreach has opted for a PON architecture, this analysis suggests that while a full fibre solution is 4 or 5 times more expensive than FTTC, the cost increment to full point to point fibre is only around 10% extra.

As things stand while many believe the best way to roll-out superfast broadband to those areas where commercial operators fear to tread, be they rural upland farms, small towns and leafy suburbs or little pockets of residential premises in drab city centres is to create a new totally independent network operator to build a new fibre backhaul network. The time frame that this would require and the level of investment when looking to deal with the varying requirements across all the premises in the final third of the UK would likely drawf the Openreach programme, and may result in the UK being permanently split between areas with a nationalised teleco (with its own natural monopoly) and the commercial sector. BT is far from perfect, but sometimes when you want something doing you have to deal with the devil you know.

Comments

Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
The BT costs to BDUK in my view do appear to ber exagerated. BT appear to be looking for a typical subsidy of about 40% per cabinet. Now in few cases that might be justified but in most I canot see how that can be justified. Most of the cabinet locations would have power available with a couple of metres and most of power

I can see a 10% subsidy being justified but not 40%

The other question is that BDUK are subsidising the capital costs so surely they should be getting back a percentage of the profits
Posted by herdwick over 4 years ago
Another data point is Lyddington http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4212-fibre-optic-broadband-in-rural-areas-lyddington.html which needed £37k raising by a small village.
Posted by herdwick over 4 years ago
BDUK ended up with a single bidder, BT's costs are academic really - as a plc they are offering to do X for £Y and if the public sector doesn't want to pay £Y it needs to negotiate, change X or walk away.

Perhaps this is negotiation by megaphone, in the style of a Trade Union.
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 4 years ago
@bob_s2 if the subsidy needed were only 10%, then why bother with the BDUK programme at all, as with all the hassle around EU state aid to approval £100m spending across the country is hardly worth the time.
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
It is likely the EU will step in. EU rules rquire a competative tender with a minimum of two bidders. In the case of the BDUK funding only BT have actually bid so there is no way to see whether BT are offering value for money.The EU may want an open book approach with BT so that the costs can be challenged
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
On the figures above perhaps we should get Deutsche Telekom to do the work. They are way cheaper than BT and Germany has higher cost then us although that is to a great extent off set by greater efficiency.

The problem of cause is BT has locked out any competition by blocking access to its ducting.

Anyone care to name a commercial user of PIA?
Posted by FTTH over 4 years ago
BT can charge what they like, cherry pick the areas they want to do.

DCMS gave them the green light to start milking so who can blame them if they do choose to. Lack of competition will slow up roll-outs and remove any desire to reduce costs.

Time for the Altnets to step up.



Posted by AndrueC over 4 years ago
If BT is overcharging then surely competing companies could undercut them. The fact the competitors appear to all be falling by the wayside suggests to me that BT's quotes are very low.
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 4 years ago
@bob_s2 how is DT cheaper, those prices are for urban, and scale it to a 288 line cabinet as Openreach deploys in urban areas, and then tell me they are cheaper.

Also do the sums on the money BDUK is allocating, often only amounts to £100 per home from BDUK + £100 from council. So still only half the amount DT would need.

In fact the DT pricing looks very like BT pricing
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
The German prices are in Euro's not Pounds
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 4 years ago
Yes and the document is old so inflation has to be taken into account to. Ignoring that

€457 is £365, so £36500 for 100 lines, or £105,000 for a 288 line cabinet.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
"Posted by Bob_s2 about 1 hour ago
The BT costs to BDUK in my view do appear to ber exagerated. "

Based on what? Your hatred of BT or actual facts/figures?
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Basedf on figures by a number of experts in the field
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Arrr that's fine then. No evidence necessary ;o)

Unless you want to supply links to these expert findings
Posted by New_Londoner over 4 years ago
Similar points being made on ISP Review.

Its well worth reading the original article, if only to see the the journalist claim that "The Government is committed to giving £1billion to BT to allow it to roll out broadband to 12 million households in the countryside", or that BT is a "broadcasting giant"!

This does not exactly inspire confidence in the quality work behin this "exclusive" story attributed to its "Senior Political Correspondent".
Posted by undecidedadrian over 4 years ago
The problem is that each cabinet will have separate challenges.

I have friends in one village that don't have street lights and so getting power to cabinets in their village suddenly becomes expensive.

Also blocked ducts will be a factor, amount of fibre from exchange to cab.

But if councils don't want to use OR, fair enough but who will they get in to hook them up they weren't flooded with bids.
Posted by leexgx over 4 years ago
FTTC makes more cost effective as all they have to do is drop a cab and they now have given 100-200ish houses VDSL Nearly instantly and only requires one man to loop the phone line into the cab that does not take very long at all to do, down side is how fast Phone wire can get, as long as its faster then 10mb/s that should be fine for long time but FTTH should be option at some point and New House installs should be Fibre only (FTTP?)
Posted by leexgx over 4 years ago
Currently where as an FTTH install stand they need to drag fiber to every house (or at least the pole) the amount of ducts they have to fix be insane but do able, the cost factor is far higher, but FTTH is Far better for Long term Future proofing and less likely to fail/Stolen compared to copper

(new house estates should be fiber install only, as BT are the ones who fit the lines anyway so better to just use fiber to start off with instead of getting stuck with 1-2mb adsl or lower on new house estates)
Posted by leexgx over 4 years ago
there used to be more bidders but they all seem to have now given up on trying to bid for the BDUK anymore as first link shows BT are the only ones bothered to upgrade the network after been fed some money to do it and still take 12 years to get there money back as that added to that of no others wanting to risk there own money on the project that has little comeback (NTL/the other 5 before seem to remind me and there currant still money they owe)

Quote >>> BT is far from perfect, but sometimes when you want something doing you have to deal with the devil you know. <<<
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Quote "Posted by undecidedadrian about 11 hours ago
The problem is that each cabinet will have separate challenges.

I have friends in one village that don't have street lights and so getting power to cabinets in their village suddenly becomes expensive."


Why should it be any more expensive than anywhere elese? Are you suggesting that this village has no electricity ? Are the houses lit by gas?

If the village has electricity it is no problem getting power for a cabinet
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Oh Bob you really are a number. Are the blinkers really on that tight?

No-one says it isn't possible to get power to this cabinet, only that it will be more difficult when compared to a street that has electrical feeds close by for other streetworks like street lights

And this is where variables come into play to make it more expensive to provide a service to one place than others.

Or are you suggesting that it costs the same to provide power to a cabinet that has a feed within 10 metres to a cabinet that's closet feed is 100 or 500metres or even 1000metres away?
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Quote"Posted by GMAN99 29 minutes ago
Oh Bob you really are a number. Are the blinkers really on that tight?"


It will not be any more difficult to get a power feed to a Cabinet in 99% of rural areas than anywhere else.


Please do explain as to why power feeds in rural areas will be a 1000 MEtres away. I would love to see you explanation. Are you suggesting that cabinets are located in the middle of a farm field? Belive it or nor rural areas actually have electricity.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
I do believe they have electricity I'm not discounting that. undecidedadrian stated that this village didn't have street lights.

My figures were just an example.

I'm saying it costs more to tap into electric feeds that are further 1away than closer (you would expect electrical feeds to be more available in built up areas no?), or are you disputing that?
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Electrical feeds are just as available in rural areas as in Urban areas and the typical distance will be no different in fact the cost of supplying power feeds in rural areas is typically less than say having to provide one in London.

Now there will be exceptions in rural areas as in Urban areas where costs are higher due to unusual circumstances but they will be very uncommon. Typically power feeds will be available in rural areas withing a few metres of a cabinet and certainly not more than 10 metres
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
I just don't know how you can make such sweeping statements. You seem to know everything about everything Bob

How can you possibly say that every BT cabinet in every rural area has power within 10 metres, do you work for a power company or BT?
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Because every rural areas has electricity. So unless BT in their wisdom decide to stick a cabinet in the middle of a field than power will be readily availble. How do you think the houses get there power?
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
But there are limits to where you can place the fibre cabinet, in relation to the existing cabinet
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Yes but that equally applies to urban area and in rural areas space is not at a premium so generally no problem as long as not a conservation area
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
I think we are missing something here.

What I'm saying is... in a rural area there could be an existing PCP (no power needed) on a street with no houses around it, where do you put your powered fibre cabinet then? Bearing in mind I believe there's a limit of 100metres or less (something like that) between the fibre cab and PCP
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Quite why they would locate a PCP remote from the houses it serves I have not a clue. It would bve daft but even if they did power would be available as long as the cabinet is on or near a roa. Power can also be obtained in some circumstances fron fields where overhead power lines pass over them.

The reality though is providing power to a cabinet in a rural is actually typically marginally lower in rural areas than in Cities
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
You are the king of sweeping statements :)

Why wouldn't the locate a PCP remote from the houses it serves, makes sense in rural deployments

If you have say 20 houses all spread out from each other at some distance why not locate the PCP in the central position to them all, that central position might not be near any power but the best place to site it in terms of distance to each home

I'm just speaking in theory, obviously you know the rural landscape and power network like the back of your hand ;)
Posted by fibrebunny over 4 years ago
I doubt BT would site a cab to suit line lengths rather than power. Maybe they do and I'm too cynical. Has this ever happened? A lack of street lighting doesn't necessarily mean there are no cables in the roads or overhead. Whether every source of power would be a viable one I wouldn't know.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
But what I mean fibrebunny is that that PCP's don't need power? So... surely they would site it where it makes sense, bearing in mind most will have been put in places eon's ago

Anyway... to say that the costs of providing power to a cabinet is the same regardless of location is nonsense. Why would a power company need to quote if its a standard one price fits all charge?
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 4 years ago
Personally I love the notion that its easier to position a cab in rural areas.

In areas with a footpath the width rules will often be a problem, and those down B roads probably have no foot path and not unusual to have the power going across the fields rather than down the roads.
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
In open rural areas that may be the case but most villages no matter how small will normaly have footpaths and mains power it may be burried in the road or on LV overhead lines. It is possibly very small hamlets may not have a footpath but they wil be fed by a PCP in a larger vilage in the area.


The reality is a typical PCP in an urban area and in a rural area would have pretty similar costs for supplying mains power

The only real cost difference in some cases ie in the most rural areas will be the cost per line as typicaly they will have a far smaller number of lines
Posted by WWWombat over 4 years ago
Why would BT site a PCP remote from the houses it serves?

The first answer is that it depends *where* the houses it serves are. If a single cluster, then the PCP is best nearby. If multiple clusters, then the PCP will be somewhere on the way towards all the clusters, but not necessarily within a single one. Same if there are no clusters at all.

But all this is irrelevant: the PCPs are already in place, where they made sense for telecomms and not power.

Bob has no knowledge whether these locations are within 1m, 10m, 100m or a km. He's guessing, but not saying so.
Posted by WWWombat over 4 years ago
@andrew:
Someone posted that BT have already reached 31,000 cabinets.

My best guess is 50,000 cabinets for the commercially-viable rollout. This from the basic assumption of reaching 20 million premises, with am average of 400 on each cabinet.
Posted by WWWombat over 4 years ago
And whether the average subsidy is 40% (or you think only 10% acceptable), the simple fact is this:

The best cabinets to upgrade to FTTC are the ones that just fail to be viable standalone. Surely these will only require 1-2% of subsidy, and 98-99% telco-funding.

The worst cabinets will be the totally uneconomic ones, needing much closer to 100% subsidy.

As a county, the best "bang-per-buck" comes by starting at the 1% cabinets, and adding as many as you can before the budget runs out.

At that point, you know what the average has turned out to be. It wouldn't surprise me to be around 40%.
Posted by phoneticduck over 4 years ago
In Rural area's PCP's are typically quite a distance from the end premises, especially in the in-scope area's of BDUK. That is a fact, and it's also why VDSL isn't the answer for all of BDUK.
But since everyone is hung up in FTTC....Things to consider...next post
Posted by phoneticduck over 4 years ago
1. Cost of the cabinet - fixed
2. Cost to install - many unknown variables in a large bid i.e. duct blockages for fibre, cost to provide power varies massively from area to area - DNO's charge plenty to run spans of overhead, a new pole and in some cases a new transformer. Also, in rural area's earthing the supply can be a huge/expensive problem depending on soil type
Posted by phoneticduck over 4 years ago
And if you invest in all of the risky cost, what return can you expect? Rural PCP's have low numbers of customers, relative to Urban, and how many in % terms per PCP will take a service....where is the return on investment?

How much extra do BT charge for FTTC over ADSL2+ ? How much incremental revenue would they stand to make?
Posted by phoneticduck over 4 years ago
the uncommercial (beyond Openreach's own NGA rollout) 1/3 of UK occupies 85% of the landmass.

It's not an easy problem to solve.
Posted by Spectre_01 over 4 years ago
Bob, you really are spouting rubbish, the more you post the more it becomes clear. I really liked this little nugget:

"...I have not a clue. It would bve daft but even if they did power would be available as long as the cabinet is on or near a roa. Power can also be obtained in some circumstances fron fields where overhead power lines pass over them."

So thats your solution, just swing a line down from an overhead power cable - do you have any idea what voltage those run at? If you say 220-240v please get a clue.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Spectre - Your telling me those power line masts don't come with 3 pin UK or commando sockets as standard? ;o)
Posted by Spectre_01 over 4 years ago
Just put some tin foil on your head and you can induct all the leccy you want.
Posted by Dixinormous over 4 years ago
Those numbers are per home connected so can't simply be scaled up to reflect a price for the fixed costs of the cabinet.

The costs of the install are by far the biggest variable, the actual cabinet hardware is a 4-figure sum.
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Quote"So thats your solution, just swing a line down from an overhead power cable - do you have any idea what voltage those run at? If you say 220-240v please get a clue"


I suggest that you have not a clue. I specifically referred to LV overhead lines
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Quote "Posted by phoneticduck about 13 hours ago
1. Cost of the cabinet - fixed
2. Cost to install - many unknown variables in a large bid i.e. duct blockages for fibre, cost to provide power varies massively from area to area "


Totally incorrect. Power to cabinets is not a major issue be it in Urban or rural areas. in 99% of cases a power feed is avaiable close by.
The cost will vary by distance and whether hard or soft dig and whether a road has to be ccrossed. THose variable though apply equally in urban or rural areas
Posted by Spectre_01 over 4 years ago
"I suggest that you have not a clue. I specifically referred to LV overhead lines"

Okay and what voltage runs through LV overhead lines? And please explain how you will take a feed from an LV OH line and make that into a safe usable feed for a VDSL street cab to run on. In detail, not the normal avoid the question tactic you use.
Posted by blink192 over 4 years ago
You're all looking in the wrong direction. In an urban roll out the typic fibre distance from DSLAM to exchange could be up to a few KM. In a rural village the nearest exchange probably doesn't have the physical space, power or the backhaul. The fibre needs to be dug to the nearest suitable exchange which could be up to 30Km away. Imagine trying to install 30Km of fibre down rural routes, no footpaths, often the only route into villages so will need complex traffic management, and in some areas no duct work at all. Costs will be massive.
Posted by cyberdoyle over 4 years ago
Our villages don't have exchanges or cabinets. Just sayin. We do have electric though. Everywhere. Even going through fields. I assume if you haven't got the old cabinet then you can't have a new cabinet? Or is BT quoting prices for installing both in villages on long line lengths? Maybe that is where the higher price is coming from? Does anyone think with all the cabs they have to enable they will take on that amount of work for 20-40 home villages?
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 4 years ago
@cyberdoyle see the news the other day on Exchange Only lines (those with no cabinets).

Am sure BT will deliver service to your area just to annoy you.
Posted by WWWombat over 4 years ago
@blink192,

I agree - the fibre-pulling cost is going to be the excessive one, compared with power.

Unfortunately, Bob has a habit of hijacking every thread at the moment, and insisting that 99% of power will be no problem - without evidence, links, or without ever answering a question. And without regard to what everyone else is talking about.
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
You appear to keep making unsubstantiated claims that it costs more but without a shred of evidence to back it up. I have checked with two utility companies who say that typically thee cost is the same for Urban & rural.

So where is the evidence that posters here claim that it can cost ten times as much. Isuggest it is unfounded fiction unless you can provide evidence to demonstrate otherwise.
Posted by Gadget over 4 years ago
And there's the key word Bob - "typically". I too have only checked a couple of companies but both seem to want to do a survey ahead of contracting to supply so I have no doubt that "typically" everything works out ok, but when there are problems "untypically" the solution is unlikely to be cheap.
Posted by phoneticduck over 4 years ago
Blink192 - not every exchange is required to house equipment to support the rollout of FTTC or FTTP. What is a consideration is the optical distance (the fibre distance) from the headend to the PCP. Typically it gets spliced via the nearest local exchange, but the size of the exchange is not relevant if it's not a headend, all that matters is that fibre capacity exists.

If it doesn't - more costs.....


Posted by blink192 over 4 years ago
@Phoneticduck

I know not every exchange has equipment. That's my point. Where equipment isn't in the local exchange there is a long fibre route back to the nearest serving exchange that adds to cost.
Posted by phoneticduck over 4 years ago
Bob - I've seen quotes from my local DNO of over £20k to supply power to a cabinet.

The average is more closely centred around a mean, but still with several thousand pounds of variation depending on, for example, a road crossing is required (U/G) or how may spans of overhead are needed.

In Urban area's then typically it's less hassle, but not always cheaper if the DNO doesn't have sufficient LV capacity on the feeding transformer for the cabinet or cabinets being supplied - and guess who has to pay to upgrade the transformer....?
Posted by phoneticduck over 4 years ago
Blink192 - you suggested it needed to be dug to the nearest "suitable" exchange, and that "suitable" is a function of the size of it, the space and power available. None of these implied conditions is accurate.



Posted by blink192 over 4 years ago
@ Bob_s2.

I'd say you aren't far of the mark saying 1% of PCPs can't find a power route. You are also correct that the *jointing* cost to connect rural and urban is the same. However in rural areas power lines are more spares so there are more road crossings and longer trenches so the average cost in rural is a lot higher than urban.
Posted by blink192 over 4 years ago
@phoneticduck
Your understanding of why particluar exchanges are chosen to house headends and why some are not is a little lacking...
Posted by phoneticduck over 4 years ago
Blink192

I was not describing what criteria where used to choose where headends go. I was correcting your post that implies long spine cable lengths are the result of small exchanges not being capable of housing headends.

I'm dying to hear your understanding of the criteria for headend selection however - please, indulge us with the facts.







Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
Powerlines are no more of a problem than in urban areas. In both Urban & rural areas the powerlines normally run under the road. It is a 3 phase supply so there are no issues at al with power ccapacity to meet the modest needs of a cabinet in fact the power need in a rural cabinet can be less simply because it serves less lines.

In a few areas the LV supply is still fed by overhead poles similar to telephone poles again this run along the streets so again no problem

Posted by WWWombat over 4 years ago
"No more of a problem"... but still a problem:
My googling shows that there *are* issues with capacity, even if the current supply runs close by. If an upgrade in transformer is required, it can take the cost from £2k up to £20k.

If a pole-mounted transformer is no longer sufficient, and a ground-based transformer/substation is needed, the cost can be more like £50k.

And don't forget the case of the NI pensioner who was quoted £67k to be connected to the grid in 2009. Problems indeed!
Posted by New_Londoner over 4 years ago
As suggested to Bob and otherson ISP Review we are blessed with abundance of financial, technical, logistical and other armchair experts that obviously know better than anyone else, especially existing operators. Clearly the best thing for the country is that they unite to form a consortium and bid for the BDUK contracts themselves in order to provide a much needed check and balance.

Posted by New_Londoner over 4 years ago
Contd

Given the huge experience and expertise that is on offer, no doubt they'll do tremendously well in business together. Fundraising will be a snap, with investors finding them irresistible. What could possibly go wrong?

;-)
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
You are right New_Londoner if you read Bob's comments (and very many) forum posts you can summarise by saying Bob could project manage the FTTC/P rollout infinitely better than BT are doing, on-time (no date slips) and on or under budget. The rollout would not be affected by any bad weather and everything would go to plan. Add to that he can also make rural FTTC deployments as cheap as rural ones and to finish it off he could do the whole thing a lot cheaper than BT as they are over pricing it.

So my question is, Bob why aren't you being head hunted!!!! :) On paper I'd hire 20 of you!
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
I have asked you to provide some kind of evidence to justify the claims that power intalls are about 10 times more expensive in rural areas and you have faild to do so.

You have come up with wild claims of having to run powetr over a 1000 metres to a cabinet. BAsed only on some wild assumption by you that the nearest power is miles away.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
I never said that, it was a speculative example. I said that its not a one price fits all for cabinets where ever they are. You (and your expert friends) say they are over priced and the price for rural installs are the same are urban. I'm saying no

All cabinet installs will have a variable price, even urban ones.
Posted by New_Londoner over 4 years ago
@Bob_s2
Will shares be available in the Amrchair Experts Consortium (AEC)?

:-)
Posted by stclares over 4 years ago
I think BT are working a fiddle where HS Broadband contracts are concerned. Here in North Yorkshire a week after they signed a contract with NYCC for fast broadband to give at least 2MBPS download speed, my connection after receiving an email saying "they were upgrading my exchange" my speed went from less than 1.5MBPS to an average of 3.0 MBPS. No works external to the exchange or in my location have occurred, so the assumption is they have been throttling the download speed in the exchange for many years.
Posted by Mr_Fluffy over 4 years ago
I don't know much about power installs for cabinets but I have had recent frustrating conversations with the main street lighting manager for my local council.

Our house is at the end of a cul-de-sac on the corner with the entrance to a multiple garage area. They decided to 'upgrade' the lighting by removing the streetlight that had been buried in the corner of the hedge at the front of our house for fifty odd years.
Posted by Mr_Fluffy over 4 years ago
Lighting had always been poor into the garage area entrance and a neighbour and I complained when they decided to resite the new streetlight a couple of metres further up the street making lighting even worse for the garage area due to an establised apple tree interfering with the lighting.
Posted by Mr_Fluffy over 4 years ago
I suggested that they should put the replacement over the other side of the street where it would not only provide light for the street proper but would shine directly into the garage area entrance and I was informed in no uncertain that it would cost too much to do that because to extend the power more than 2 metres would require major work by the electricity people, so the 5 metres or so to the other side of the street was a no-no.
Posted by Mr_Fluffy over 4 years ago
(We've since had several garage burglaries in the appallingly badly lit garage area!)
Posted by machanch over 4 years ago
This is a most interesting thread. I enjoyed Bob_s2 comments. He continues in his arguments showing he has no understanding, of the planning and installation cost involve in deploying DSLAM/PCP/Power for FTTC.. I believe he is only commenting here to get a re-action.

Posted by machanch over 4 years ago
There are some fixed costs (DSLAM Serving, 100/200 customers) in installing and commissioning a street DSLAM. However the major part of the cost is in putting in the infrastructure, to start delivering any kind of service. (distance cost, doesn't matter what length be it 1, 5, 10 meters).
Posted by machanch over 4 years ago


I have seen PCP in the middle of a field, with no houses nearby. Yes those were put in before the digital age came onto us. I guess in the days when only the rich could afford it, that was the correct place to deploy the PCP... the farmer, the doctor and those who could afford telephone got connected.
The cost to relocate that PCP would have to be factored in to the cost if it had to be moved.
So do understand the cost would vary for every install of a DSLAM Cabinet in a rural environment.
Posted by searcher100 over 4 years ago
I am not a BT fan but the statement that you can tap into overhead cables is not a thing for sane people to engage in. My Father was a high tension cable jointer and connected many substations and rural areas. A lot of areas have cables installed in the 50,s no building is allowed outside the villages. Exchanges and cabinets are not all ways where you think they should be and city living people shouldn't make unsubstantiated comments about deployment costs in rural areas. They could be much higher cost to deployment but probably less planning problems.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.