Skip Navigation


Gigabit Ready by end of 2018 for Liberty Global across Europe
Friday 25 November 2016 12:25:21 by Andrew Ferguson

Liberty Global has declared that its extensive cable broadband empire across Europe is set to be Gigabit Ready by the end of 2018, so just two years a couple of weeks away. For anyone following the path of DOCSIS, this is no surprise as DOCSIS 3.1 is now starting to appear in some countries, but still encouraging to have a date for when we can expect to have products using it available.

For those not aware, DOCSIS 3.1 is an upgrading to the existing hybrid fibre coax network that Virgin Media has serving 49% of UK households and it will offer Gigabit download speeds and much improved upload speed options. We believe that DOCSIS 3.1 could appear quickly in some areas, but better to wait a little while and get the network and roll-out to the point where both improved download and upload speeds are an option.

How much will this cost to roll-out? Surprisingly little based on an extensive policy paper than looks at the many countries Liberty Global operate in, and the magic figure is in the €20 to €34 per property (given current exchange rates call it the same in £), the lower figure is a Liberty Global estimate, with the €34 estimate coming from a US operator deploying 3.1 already.

The policy paper at 49 pages long is something everyone involved in the broadband industry should read and there are some interesting discussions about the world leaders in FTTP South Korea and Japan. The key summary is that while Liberty Global sees a firm place for FTTP, economics often favour a mixed technology approach i.e. sweat existing assets rather than full replace, with DOCSIS having the potential for multiple Gigabit speeds in the future it has life let and the socio-economic benefits of pure fibre are not always automatic.

"Korean consumers also make narrower use of the internet than those in other countries (Figure 21), typically participating in five activities, compared to over seven in Germany and the UK, which each have very little FTTH. (Example activities are email, social networking, online banking, use of e-gov services and so on).

The European Commission has stated that:

Gigabit connectivity is already a reality in countries such as Japan and South Korea, and is translating into increasing usage of video and high bandwidth applications”.

However, in reality South Korea’s internet video use is only moderately higher than the UK (31.9 vs 23.4 GB/month per capita in 2015), and Japan’s use is far lower, at 12.6 GB/month – this despite an almost complete absence of FTTP and gigabit offers in the UK market.

Liberty Global on South Korea

This is a very different view compared to the everyone is embracing Gigabit speeds and doing masses of stuff online one that is often presented, and highlights the danger of believing the PR. In the UK we are naturally sceptical of PR originating in the UK, but are seem happy to accept the good news from abroad on broadband, or speed comparison charts where the UK data is easy to show as flawed and potentially the same across the globe making it worthless.

Online Video use in the UK has been a major driver for people wanting better speeds and it looks like we are doing a lot of it, part of this is the success of the BBC iPlayer and in 2016 that was pushed further when BBC Three moved to be an online only channel.

So is Liberty Global putting FTTP on a downer? The conclusion of which a snippet shown below indicates that this is not the case but urges that care is needed, and remember that this is an operator talking about its operations across 12 countries in Europe not just the UK.

"FTTP appears not to have delivered on its promise in Japan, South Korea and Australia. It has neither given them leading domestic application usage, nor has it positioned them as global players in the applications market. Indeed, US experience suggests that very high speeds are certainly not required to be a global internet leader – average US speeds would be mid-tier by European standards.

That said, the disappointments of FTTP in Japan, South Korea and Australia (and some other markets) certainly do not prove that ultrafast cannot be a worthwhile intervention. However, it does suggest that great care is required to ensure that:

  • The benefits of the intervention outweigh costs
  • The benefits are delivered in the most cost-efficient manner possible
  • There are not unintended adverse consequences.
Lessons from Liberty Global Report

Putting our UK centric hat on, those operators rolling out FTTP now is great, please do more, those with more FTTP plans, carry on and we want more, but the message is clear deployment does not necessarily equal a flood of automatic benefits and given the UK's good levels of coverage at speeds capable of doing what the majority want benefits of expensive an FTTP roll-out may be even further from automatic. The business sector is one that where a targeted roll-out guaranteeing every business park where landlords can be convinced will get FTTP options at below Ethernet pricing could be more beneficial than a blind target of 40% of the UK.

Of course for those in the 1.1 million premises (well over two million people) where speeds of under 10 Mbps are the only affordable option now, there will be screams of give us something better now and largely they care little for the machinations of the regulatory and commercial environment they are feeling neglected and ignored and shouting louder and louder every week, and this volume is increasing such that while the size of the under 10 Mbps footprint is shrinking those with no visible plans for improvement other than the 10 Mbps USO for 2020 the remainers volume more than increases to compensate.

Comments

Posted by WWWombat 11 days ago
I suspect the "There are not unintended adverse consequences" comment is aimed squarely at the UK regulator: Don't meddle!

One consequence affected by current strategy is future backhaul for mobile. BT have shown that G.Fast can support cloud-RAN fronthaul access; can DOCSIS 3.1? What about either for backhaul services for 5G?
Posted by TheEulerID 11 days ago
This tends to show why governments (and their agencies) should stay out of second guessing technology and ought to stick to functionality, coverage, social impact and public finance issues.

As it is, OR will have to respond to VM where it impacts on what consumers want to do and are prepared to pay for.
Posted by AndrueC 11 days ago
"FTTP appears not to have delivered" that doesn't surprise me. There always was too much thoughtless screaming for more bandwidth from people who never understood the wider market. The more, more, moooor! brigade have always been out of touch.
Posted by AndrueC 11 days ago
The major use case has always been video but the UK has always had good video delivery systems (terrestrial then satellite and nearly half of us can get cable). The only thing we lacked was VoD and by the time we had the hardware for that our internet provision had largely caught up.

Not that VoD has really proved a huge draw either. People still seem to like the 'fire-side' sharing experience of watching content with thousands of other people.
Posted by AndrueC 11 days ago
FTTP has advantages obviously but it's still not essential. Just something we need to be working (fairly hard) toward. It's interesting to note that for all people moan about UK internet usage we've always been amongst highest per-capita users.

Somehow despite how 'crap' people like to claim UK internet access is it's never stopped us from making more use of the internet than most other countries.
Posted by RuralWire 11 days ago
With the seemingly inexorable rise of digital-by-default and online-only services, is it any wonder that those who are destined to remain beyond the reach of BDUK and reliant upon the settlement of the USO issue make their views known?
Posted by RuralWire 11 days ago
"As NGA and VHC investment proceeds the emerging challenge is not primarily making even higher speed access available to some, but ensuring that access capable of supporting key applications is extended to all."

"A mixed technology approach is even more important in more economically challenging areas to ensure that those that do not have decent broadband get it as fast as possible and at reasonable cost."

Connectivity for the Gigabit Society - Liberty Global Policy Series

Amen to that.
Posted by WWWombat 9 days ago
@RuralWire
I can't argue with either of those posts.

It is those "beyond reach of BDUK [who] make their views known" from your first post, that insist your second post is wrong, that FTTP-for-all is the only viable strategy, that seem to cause the fights.

Maybe things would be different if "reasonable cost" followed the pre-WWII scheme, and allowed line rental to be effectively pro-rata to length.
Posted by johnmiles101 8 days ago
Report is well worth reading - full of insights and well researched data. Agree that UK achieves much higher actual broadband usage (GBytes) than other countries with higher FTTP deployment.

Of course FTTP makes good sense for new build or slow copper lines. But benefit for for most users on well performing copper is very unclear.

Its also unclear what GFast really brings - given that it will be deployed on short lines that already have good VDSL performance.
Posted by RuralWire 8 days ago
@WWWombat - Government minsters have started clambering aboard the FTTP for all bandwagon. No doubt OFCOM will join the parade shortly. Unfortunately, the Altnets vision falls short of FTTP for all (see Building Gigabit Britain - INCA). Near universal coverage by 2030 is what is on offer. What does near universal coverage mean? Is that 96%, 97%, 98% or 99% FTTP coverage? No doubt the overwhelming majority of those that would be beyond the near universal coverage of FTTP are those that are beyond the reach of the ongoing BDUK programme. Namely, the harder to reach rural premises.
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) 8 days ago
Dare one suggest that G.fast is an experiment to see if the demand is there for much faster from those that can get something in the 30 to 40 Mbps region already.

It also reduces the amount of civils required dramatically if you want an ultrafast option on your network, i.e. could go beyond 10 million and those falling off the edge speed wise see smaller g.fast nodes or FTTP infill.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.