Skip Navigation

BBC Rip Off Britain Live looks at broadband speeds
Tuesday 21 October 2014 09:09:29 by Andrew Ferguson

The BBC show Rip Off Britain is running a series of live programmes this week, and today they will include broadband speeds as one of their items and will have a Government Minister to tell us all about broadband.

Watch it live, or catch up later using the BBC iPlayer or rush over to a TV if your broadband is too slow. The broadband segment featuring Ed Vaizey MP was featured in the first 15 minutes of the show for those wanting to re-watch on iPlayer.

In summary after watching the show, no single TV programme was going to solve the worlds broadband problems and while Ed Vaizey may have given a politicians answer with the fact that the BDUK programme is taking time to deliver. Ironically some of the problems with the transparency, costs and clarity over the roll-out is because the rushed programme started to operate before the market led roll-outs had completed and in a traditional market sector market failure would have only been announced a few years after the roll-out ceased. The concurrent roll-out alongside the commercial programmes in 2013 though has largely given way to almost all new fibre cabinets being part of a BDUK programme. The combined total of live fibre cabinets is thought to be around 57,000 at this time.


Posted by joe_pineapples over 2 years ago
A programme watched by the retired and unemployed, and presented by over the hill tv presenters. You can see how much influence it will have on anything.
Posted by lockyatlrg over 2 years ago
The idiots a bought a house in the middle of nowhere moaning about speed need to get a grip.. you can't have it both ways..
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 2 years ago
They did get a boost visit, which usually means faceplate to isolate ring wire and got better speeds of 1 Mbps rather than the previous 0.6 Mbps.

Five years 0.6 Mbps was actually pretty common speed, that is how much things have changed.
Posted by Blackmamba over 2 years ago
Hi Broadband Watchers.
In Surrey the programme is one phase (3 months ) ahead and is in budget 84k custermers to pass covering 620 cabs their is aprox 50 Cabs to do and most of them are standing and powered up.
Posted by baby_frogmella over 2 years ago
"Hi Broadband Watchers"
God i missed you Mamba ;)
Posted by PhilCoates over 2 years ago

What happens if you didn't move to a house in the middle of nowhere but happened to have lived there many years i.e. since before the internet. Are you still an idiot and are you allowed to moan? Do I still need to get a grip and can I have it both ways?
Posted by Blackmamba over 2 years ago
Hi Phil from phil40phil
Even in Surrey they are hitting the custermers who live in the Surrey Hills so do not be down hearted just keep placing your speed on Thinkbroadband maps
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) over 2 years ago
And got the pictures of some Surrey FTTP to do in a short while.
Posted by TheEulerID over 2 years ago

No, but ought to recognise that you've just been caught out by an accident of history. By all means start a campaign to justify, in the wider social interests, such services in your area should be cross-subsidised. However, that doesn't mean there's a justifiable grievance when it's really a matter of economics. After all, many in previously open areas have found themselves urbanised through housing development, and have lost out in other ways.
Posted by TheEulerID over 2 years ago
nb. It's pretty clear there rural BB issues are going to get sorted out over time. However, what's really required is a regulatory model which provides for a sustainable, cross-subsidisation system which does not land the cost on the public sector. However, for good or ill, the government has favoured a market-driven approach where some operators can "cherry pick".
Posted by Blackmamba over 2 years ago
Hi Andrew staff
I hope to be there when Openreach pulls in the fibre via ducting and overhead as it was in my Maintence Area.
Posted by gerarda over 2 years ago
If rural areas had been not been subsidising urban ones, London in particular, for many years the councils could have afforded to fund proper broadband for their rate payers without central subsidy.
Posted by TheEulerID over 2 years ago

I should add that I'm not a Londoner. However, London most certainly is not a net receiver of public funds. It provides disproportionate amounts of stamp duty, business rates, income tax & VAT receipts to the exchequer.
Posted by TheEulerID over 2 years ago
nb. I live in the South East which, of course, has the lowest rate of public expenditure per-head in England yet yields one of the highest per-head tax incomes, so I do see the issues. However, a redistributive (nationally) tax and expenditure system is part of the political "settlement" in the country. My view is that and cross-subsidy ought to be within the regulated telecommunications industry, not via public money.
Posted by gerarda over 2 years ago
£15bn for crossrail? £50bn for HS2
Posted by MCM999 over 2 years ago
@Gerada. Crossrail is not for Londoners but those from the edges wanting to travel to London. As for HS2 again how exactly do Londoners benefit other than as an escape route? London puts far more into the pot than it receives. For example no BDUK funds despite many not spots and thousands of EO lines.
Posted by TheEulerID over 2 years ago

I don't think you'll find many people in London (or for that matter, the South East) who think HS2 is meant to help them. Cross-Rail is, of course, of benefit to London but even more to South East commuters (and I live in Maidenhead).

Anyway, those are capital investments, much of which will be recovered either directly (through fares) or indirectly (through increased tax revenues).

Here's an article on net beneficiaries by region
Posted by gerarda over 2 years ago
that articleassumes the financial service industry is a net contributor to the wealth of the country- the last 10 years suggests ootherwise
Posted by lockyatlrg over 2 years ago

Live in the sticks - get crap speeds /end :D
Posted by Plankton1066 over 2 years ago
@philcoates Sticks??? This is just rot, you're living in some kind 18th century Downton Abbey meets the Australian outback fantasy. There are no "sticks" in the UK save for a a couple of Scottish Islands. We're the second most densely populated major economy in the western world after the Netherlands and the bits that are not towns or cities are dormatory settlements to them.
Posted by csimon over 2 years ago
Can we stop infighting and trolling again please over rural vs urban and economics and choosing where to live! The fact is that some areas or more expensive than others to provide services to, whether they're urban or rural is moot, it's just a fact of life. The question is what services are deemed reasonably essential for everyone. those services should be provided by the state & funded by taxes, non-essential services can be left to market forces and economics. Is decent telecomms a reasonably essential service in this day and age?
Posted by csimon over 2 years ago
It's quite obvious that the government thinks decent telecomms is "reasonably essential" as it has now stepped in with public money to provide it.
Posted by Blackmamba about 1 year ago
Hi Babe "Broadband Watchers"
Watched recording the customer with Talktalk was getting the service they were paying for and they were on CN20 when they could have been on CN21.just by paying a little more.
The first couple were on an exchange with on access to CN 20 if the exchange was CN21 enabled there download speed would have been over 3 meg mark.
It is Openreach who provides the service not (BT ISP) even the minister ED does not understand.
Posted by essenby about 1 year ago
My exchange, 3 miles from the centre of Sheffield is not fibre enabled because of "high commercial costs". These costs only seem to affect OR because both Virgin and the now defunct Digital Region both managed to provide fibre for most subscribers. Now that I have lost DR my service has fallen back to <2Mbps which, considering the location, is abysmal. The real reason, I suspect, is the high number of SME's on the exchange which are forced down the leased line route to obtain a usable service.
Posted by Blackmamba about 1 year ago
Hi Ess. Broadband Watchers
I expect it was not cost effective to provide FTTC because in your area at the time (DR ) entered the market because (BT service ) would have been to expensive so they went to better returns it is call compertion.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.