Skip Navigation


Paris suburbs to benefit from FTTH network
Thursday 11 April 2013 10:50:36 by Andrew Ferguson

France announced a €20 billion spending on fibre networks a couple of months ago and now an agreement has been signed between France Telecom, SFR (Vivendi) and the lle-de-France that will see a full fibre to the premise (FTTH/FTTP) network rolled out to some 4.7 million households (89% of those in the lle-de-France region).

The deployment area comprises six counties in the region, but excludes the city of Paris, the six are Essonne, Seine et Marne, Seine-Saint Denis, Val de Marne, Val d'Oise and Yvelines. The city of Paris itself which is not covered has a population around the 2.2 million mark.

The roll-out appears to be a mixture of commercial and public funding, with the aim to have completed this roll-out by 2020. Compared to announced plans in the UK it far outreaches what any operator or the Government or those in oppossition have announced as plans moving forward for the UK.

Can anyone imagine in the UK an agreement between BT and Virgin Media to roll-out their own FTTH solution in some areas, sharing infrastructure in other areas and then working with local authorities in the less commercially viable areas? The outcry of the state lining the two operators pockets would be enormous, perhaps more so than the current complaints about how the BDUK projects are working out.

Comments

Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Indeed!

France at quite happy to have a mixture of public/private funding, but here people go crazy
Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
PIA prices are pretty much the same, but it works over there... no handbags about it being too expensive. But, then again the other ISPs are all willing to fork out and build infrastructure... not the same here.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Yes I suspect that is the big difference.
Posted by pcoventry76 over 4 years ago
I don't think i've ever seen France given 20 million to africa OR let immigrants pollute their economy.

That's the difference between there and here. Just a 40 min ride under the channel.
Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
@pcoventry

ROFL, that's so funny! Ignorance is bliss.

They give ~£3Bn to African nations every year.

They have just as many immigrants from North Africa, their former colonies and EU states as the UK does immigrants from commonwealth countries and EU states!

Both the UK and France have about 10% immigrant populations.

Just google it...
Posted by Dixinormous over 4 years ago
Maybe they can use PIA to serve businesses as well as residential customers?
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
I see this keep getting mentioned every now and again, is that right that business premises cannot be served using PIA?
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
The key to getting progress in the UK is to remove the local loop from BT and float it of as a separate company. The local loop though would be a government asset and this company would be give a fixed term lease of the local loop. It would go out to public tender every 5 years to ensure value for money

The tricky bit is as to how you fund investment in the local loop as with a short lease as with the railways companies are reluctant to invest as they may not get a return. There are ways around it though.

With the local loop independent of BT you remove the current conflict of interest
Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
@Bob_s2

the creation of a local loop equivalent of the National Grid would work, but it would need to incorporate all local loop, so BT, VM, KC and all the little ISPs (Gigaclear, B4RN, etc..)that have just built stuff...
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
And how would the government buy the local loop, the cost would be huge. And why are you convinced it would be better that way, which ISP's are wanting to invest in the local loop that cannot at the moment, any?
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
The actual key to getting progress in the UK is

For ISP's to actually spend money, Sky were up for it with LLU and I'm sure they will be in the future, not so sure about Talk Talk and BE.

The other is for Virgin to be classified as SMP which it is and get their network opened up as well. Both BT and Virgin ducts/poles opened up with the same pricing and rules/regs
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 4 years ago
For those looking for the restrictions still, screenshot, so if PDF vanishes the info is not lost.

http://www.coolwebhome.co.uk/images/duct-pole-sharing-restrictions.jpg
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Thanks Andrew, so (maybe I'm wrong) I do not see that as saying you cannot use PIA for businesses? Is just saying you cannot use it for leased lines (fair do's) but an ISP can still use it to get fibre to a street and connect to homes or businesses, its just the point to point that is a no go?
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
That is how I read 3.2.1

And 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 are fair enough as well.
Posted by herdwick over 4 years ago
I think PIA has to be used for an NGA solution to multiple premises only, as its the "access network" where Openreach have SMP which allows OFCOM to mandate access to it. So if it looks like a local loop solution using BT infrastructure it's fine, otherwise it isn't.

Being able to use it to backhaul an FTTC cab but not a fixed wireless local loop solution is more restrictive than perhaps it might have been.
Posted by herdwick over 4 years ago
@Bob_s2 we don't have one owner of the national electricity infrastructure and none of them are the Govt. Gas is one company, but that isn't the Govt either. So where's the shining example to follow ?

Even labour gave up on nationalisation.
Posted by ValueforMoney over 4 years ago
The French Gov did declare the INternet a universal right, FTTP was defined as a new market as opposed to there being no market failure, infrastructure sharing was forced to prevent overbuild and permit government aid where no existing infrastructure exists, ARCEP created the building operator model to support pro-competitive measures.
UBF could be used to test some of this.
Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
A lot of the municipalities is France own infrastructure too, so where they offer access to infrastructure they make it work as it is in their interests. As opposed to it's another companies infrastructure, where they see it as a burden and liability. e.g. Paris's sewer system has allowed multiple ISPs to put their fibre into it and they all can compete "fairly".
Posted by Bob_s2 over 4 years ago
The issue holding back other ISP's is the BT stranglehold on the local loop. To try to compete with an incumbent monopoly player that already has a 100% of the market outside of the cabled areas is almost an impossibility. In the few small areas where ISP's have had a go have found that BT then moves in to squeeze them out.

There are in reality only two ISP's that could really even attempt to compete with BT and that's Sky & Virgin

BT whilst they have no completion are not going to worry to much about FTTP
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Sigh how many times? It doesn't have 100% of the market, have you actually seen the market share at the top??? Sky and Talk Talk have millions of subscribers

mill-ions
Posted by ValueforMoney over 4 years ago
Birmingham, Manchester, Derby have all used Ofcom's WLA/WBA consult. to re-state their ambition and need for pro-competitive fibre transition activity to keep ahead of their competitors in other cities. It is disappointing London did not make their ambition clear to Ofcom.
I have not seen anything from Ofcom or Gov asking as to would be needed to kickstart a 15-20 year long process.
Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
Nothing to stop ISPs SLU,hardly any of that happening... mostly because they won't commit the capital and play the long game.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Even if BT duct space was free I very much doubt you'd see anyone with maybe the exception of Sky rolling out their own fibre, like you say themanstan they don't want to invest.
Posted by ValueforMoney over 4 years ago
Ofcom who need to pick their battles carefully and have not chosen SLU as one of them, due to lack of demand. Conditions do need to be set up for FTTP, and perhaps the network divisions of some of the existing providers could come together to create a challenger in urban but the incentives for build/sharing all need mapping out and this is missing from Ofcoms work plan and unsure whether it is in Comms Review.
Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
@VFM

But why the lack of demand? SLU is the fibre equivalent of LLU. ISPs should see it as an opportunity to get the same kind of gains as they do from LLU, except they have to commit... and that is the crux, a lack of commitment!
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
Unlike other countries our ISP's don't want to invest in their own network even when given the opportunity (SLU/PIA) they would rather the incumbent do the expensive bit and then demand via Ofcom a product to suit them.
Posted by ValueforMoney over 4 years ago
LLU took about five efforts before it was in a shape that folk would invest. I think SLU lends itself to wholesale/VULA unless the state invested in mutualising the SLU streetware and duct repair/path. As it turns out given the subsidy levels in rural this could have happened but that moment has passed. Investment in pro-competitive FTTP in urban will need some strong policy making, good incentives and a regulator required to look more than 4 years ahead.
Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
nothing to stop ISP now from sharing the SLU infrastructure and the capital costs... except themselves...
Posted by ValueforMoney over 4 years ago
@themanstan .SLU not ready, industry sharing agreeing, building operator model not in place, neither has PO/OLO or the regulator looked beyond VULA, so, much to be get started upon.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
SLU is in use isn't it?
Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
Yorkshire Digital Region is SLU...

Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
YDR has been going for 2 years, like I said nothing to stop industry but their own indecision and lack of commitment...
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
And Rutland, so... clearly not only ready but has been in use for years. Next excuse....
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 4 years ago
YDR is a lot older than two years.

Issue in the UK is that some providers want the retail customers, but without the risk of building the physical networks themselves.

Add this to the I want faster and better for the same or less price from consumer and investment is hard here.
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
That is the issue in the UK, but those same providers complain "its not fair". In the USA ISP's build their own, it seems to work over there.
Posted by Dixinormous over 4 years ago
No idea where you get that ISPs build their own in the USA and it seems to work. The USA has a lot of issues with competition, many areas are a duopoly of the retail product of the incumbent or the cable company.
Posted by themanstan over 4 years ago
France is the proper example, multiple ISPs all building fibre networks to serve residential...
Posted by GMAN99 over 4 years ago
I was thinking about an ISP like Verizon FiOS
Posted by WWWombat over 4 years ago
Ooooh - an announcement like this would go down well here, right?

"Westminster just announced that it was subsidising a project by BT and Virgin to roll out fibre to the Home Counties"
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.