Looking for a great value broadband deal? War-torn Syria will do you proud

After a third trip to thrash the router this morning, Brits might not be too surprised to learn that they're being ripped off for broadband compared to their pals across the Channel. Even so, consumer telecoms analyst at Cable.co.uk has laid out how the UK fared in its 2020 Global Broadband Pricing League Table. And if value …

[Anonymous Coward]

The "problem" of FTTP is that it makes the old copper network valueless all at once

So the current owner of the copper network has all the incentives to delay any rollout of a fibre network it can't control fully. That's especially true where you have an ex-monopolist in larger countries that still controls the copper network, and still gains a lot from it with relatively little maintenance costs - so it has very little incentives to deploy a costly fibre network to replace it fully - moreover when investments needs - in executives' minds - to be directed to the shiny-shiny 5G where expected margins are higher because it's more fashionable, and deploy somewhat less expensive than fibre (no need to dig the last mile).

Expect many to promote 5G as a replacement for FTTP, which is not.

[Christopher Reeve's Horse]

Re: The "problem" of FTTP is that it makes the old copper network valueless all at once

A fairly simple regulatory policy chance could fix that - no new copper installation, all asset repairs and maintenance should be on upgrade only terms.

[Anonymous Coward]

"simple regulatory policy chance could fix that"

Yes, you can't expect the "market" to fix this. The "market" suggests to delay fibre deployment and exploit the copper as long as it is possible before alienating customers - and if customers have nowhere to go it's a captive market.

Anyway, "repairs and maintenance" only as a substitution mean can't be the solution because a fibre network is inherently different from a copper one, and will took too long. If a new higher-speed network is deemed both critical and strategic, policy makes have to force companies into investing, or have the government invest itself.

[LondonDario]

Re: The "problem" of FTTP is that it makes the old copper network valueless all at once

Unfortunately PM Johnson doesn't tend to sweat the small stuff once the elections have been won

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The "problem" of FTTP is that it makes the old copper network valueless all at once

"Unfortunately PM Johnson doesn't tend to sweat the small stuff once the elections have been won"

He won one election only a month ago. Hardly a factual comment.

[joeldillon]

Re: The "problem" of FTTP is that it makes the old copper network valueless all at once

Not the first election he's ever won though, is it? He was Mayor of London twice in a row, for one thing. Something something Garden Bridge...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The "problem" of FTTP is that it makes the old copper network valueless all at once

Every time copper thieves nick BT cable, BT should be forced to replace it with fibre.

Note to self, steal own drop wire.

[IGotOut]

Re: The "problem" of FTTP is that it makes the old copper network valueless all at once

How do you think that will make it cheaper?

Say they rip up 200m of cable.

You then have to replace every street box inline before and after with a new POWERED street box, then if you want fttp, every single connection from that.

All while business and homes have no phones or internet connectivity.

So you go from a few hours repair, to several weeks.

[Anonymous Coward]

"every street box inline before and after with a new POWERED street box"

No, PON isn't powered - the P is for Passive. It uses optical splitters to divide the downstream beams, and the OLT allocates fixed timeslots to user devices for transmitting upstream.

You still need to replace all the cables to the premises, and install the new equipment which is more complex to install than copper. Bringing cables to each premise is the most expensive part, usually. If you have existing ducts/poles you can reuse, it may be cheaper. Otherwise it is not.

[Joe Drunk]

You get what you pay for

As a left-pondian it's true that I do pay $60/month for 100Mb/s internet. I've never had any issues, I get a constant speed peak/off peak and have had only one outage in 5 years. Unfortunately if I move I will be stuck with whatever provider is servicing the area and from what I've heard other providers (one affectionately known as ComCrap) doesn't provide as good service. If I want good internet I'm stuck here.

[Dr_N]

Victorian Infrastructure.

Can't have a world class network based on Victorian infrastructure.

Oh, sorry. Wrong network excuse. My bad.

[Dan 55]

Price per Mbps

1Mbps of bandwidth in the UK will cost you on average USD 1.07 per month, compared to USD 0.12 in Sweden, USD 0.20 in Portugal or USD 0.21 in Spain.

Are they comparing the actual speed you get or the 'up to' advertised speed which you'll probably never get?

[sebbb]

Re: Price per Mbps

Majority of Spain is FTTP, as the article said, so physical issues that affect copper (hence the performance drop) are not an issue with full fibre. In Italy as well, which is mentioned in the ranking as one of the cheapest, you get 1Gb/300Mb for 29€. The issue with Italy at the moment is adoption, people are not switching that fast to FTTP as they should, so the speed average remains low. However, when the rollout in rural areas will also complete around 2021, things will be pretty much looking like Romania (apart from the wires hanging from the poles).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Price per Mbps

The problem is Italy is that, for example, in the most wealthy areas of the North, many people live "dispersed" in smaller cities and towns. For example, Milan has only 1,4M population, many people live in the vast conurbation around it up to the other cities of Lombardy - an area that cannot be defined "rural" only - but which makes reaching them more expensive than cabling larger buildings close to each other. Many are still on ADSL only, not even FTTC. The same happens in Veneto and Emilia-Romagna (they are 1st, 3rd and 4th in Italian GDP...)

At first government gave precedence to the poorer regions of the South for high speed networks - in the hope that a faster Internet would bring more investments to fight unemployment and poverty - but of course it was wrong - high-speed internet alone won't achieve that result, while people with less money have less incentives to get a high speed connection. Some fibre deployments assigned to the incumbent were even left "swtiched off" because no operator was interested to offer the service. Now they think to offer "vouchers" to incentivize it....

Then government adopted a different approach to cover the remaining areas - using public and EU funds and putting up a tender. The incumbent TIM proposed a FTTC project using its copper network - a new competitor proposed a new FTTP network and won. The new network will be public (being paid with public money) but the company deploying will manage it for 20yrs - but can sell the network use wholesale only.

That project is now about a year late, and won't be probably completed in 2021. The first hundred or so areas (each area is more or less the territory of a small town, some larger, up to some tens thousand people, other small, some thousands or less) have been activated in the second half of the past year, more should be activated this year. The architecture uses GPON with 1:16 splitting, and the actual offerings are 1Gb down and up to 300Mb up (depends on the provider) for about 25-30€, usually including phone calls which are delivered via VoIP.

It will be interesting to know now if the FTTP adoption will increase and justify the investments. One of the problems is the ex-monopolist is trying whatever it can to delay deployments while trying to take control of the new network asking the government to force a merger.

It could become a case study of the issues when deploying a new network....

[sebbb]

Re: Price per Mbps

Being an italian living in the UK, I know very well the situation. However, not all north regions are that healthy, especially the one where I come from (Friuli Venezia Giulia). You're right in saying that one of the very big issues is disperse houses that characterise the italian towns. But I think that this year will really come with acceleration, most of the problems with authorisations and planning have been solved and completed and the works are now a lot more smoothly running. In my area in the mountains it is quite at a good point, maybe the fact that we had even no ADSL most of the times fuelled our appetite for broadband and councils were very interested to get it done fast and quick. Putting fibre everywhere is after all the biggest project in telecoms history since the development of the copper PSTN.

Of course the incumbent wants to get in the way of that deployment, especially when despite the long standing calls for spinning off the network we still have an infrastructure completely owned by the incumbent which also controls investment (on this point we have to admit that the british have done it better with Openreach)... TIM won't ever give up the property of the copper network (given it was used as guarantee for their enormous debt made post-privatisation).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Price per Mbps

Well, if you look at this chart (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_regions_by_GDP), even Friuli-Venezia-Giulia is not placed so bad (let's remember in Italy it is a "special autonomy" region with not a few privileges...) - even compared to UK and France.

Anyway what I meant is that increasing ultra broadband adoption requires a "carrot and stick" approach - and broadband deployments alone won't work as economic driver, so ISP may be wary to invest in equipment and backhauling/backbone bandwidth if they don't see a real return of investment.

Demography and education matter too - cabling places with an older population from where most young educated people emigrate will mean lower adoption, and young people won't stay there just because they have a faster internet. Meanwhile delaying roll out in more dynamic areas will jsut hamper their competitiveness compared to other countries - without any benefit outside them (and it may also mean less taxable revenues....)

So governments needs a two pronged strategy - keep the dynamic areas going on (so ISP can still make money, after the investment/subsidies), and at the same time invest in the less lucky areas and maybe tell ISP that if they want to offer services in the former, they also have to offer them in the latter - even when they are less remunerative. In Italy prices are already very compressed with probably low margins - it is not wise to ignore the areas with the higher number of possible customers.

Let the market alone, and you'll get the US situation with five networks in big cities, and none outside.

[Dan 55]

Re: Price per Mbps

There's also backhaul, not everyone's going to get 500Gbps at the same time.

[iron]

Re: Price per Mbps

I often get more than my advertised "up to" speed for short bursts. Admitedly I am about 150 yards from the cabinet and in an area with low traffic.

[IGotOut]

Re: Price per Mbps

I also get more than advertised nearly all the time and I'm on ADSL2. 16mbs is fine for me

[anthonyhegedus]

Pissed off with the whole UK broadband thing

It's all very well saying that 96% of the country get 'superfast' (if you can call up to 80/20 'superfast' - yes it is compared to 1Mbps but it isn't compared to 1000mbps), BUT - those 4% who can't are stuck with really crappy outdated speeds and it's affecting their ability to work and enjoy the services everyone else enjoys. We have customers out in the sticks (and some not so out in the sticks) who can only get useful broadband if they get a leased line. Sometimes the install is free, sometimes it's £12000. The monthly figures are around £250-400 to get 100 ot 1000Mbps. They literally have to pay 10x more than they do more the same connection at home. This is a ridiculous situation.

This 4% of people who are not of superfast might have to wait 5,10, 15 years even, for proper broadband. It's a scandal.

[Lazlo Woodbine]

Re: Pissed off with the whole UK broadband thing

I'm on a sporadically reliable 10Mbps copper connection, but some of my neighbours are on upwards of 200Mbps because they have fibre to their cabinet, I don't have fibre to the cabinet I'm connected to, the cabinets are about 100 yards apart, Openreach have no current plans to sling a fibre to my cabinet.

[iron]

Re: Pissed off with the whole UK broadband thing

They could always move to somewhere that has fast internet.

What do you look for in a home? Size, transport links, schools, hospitals, location, broadband speeds and more are all factors in a compromise and if you're desparate to live next to a field you're going to suffer in some of the others.

[anthonyhegedus]

Re: Pissed off with the whole UK broadband thing

This is what I tell our customers. They've got an office with cheap rent or a warehouse with a good size yard (and cheap rent). If they moved closer to a city, they'd get cheaper braodband but the rent would go up. We do have an exception: one of our customers moved to an industrial park that has been built in the last 10 years. Fibre? Yes, if you pay for a leased line. Oh? Don't want to pay that much? That's OK, you can have 8Mbps ADSL.

[Venerable and Fragrant Wind of Change]

Re: Pissed off with the whole UK broadband thing

I'd be fine with 8Mbps ADSL as a tradeoff for living somewhere nice. It was the coming of then-2Mbps ADSL sixteen years ago that took me from poverty to prosperity, and my best years were at 2Mbps rising later to 8Mbps.

The showstopper would be no connectivity at all, or insufficient for VOIP and intermittent for everything (like Virgin cable). Or connectivity on dialup/ISDN terms of pay-by-the-minute.

But with satellite broadband now at affordable monthly prices, there are very few places indeed that are completely unserved. Down a steep valley you'd want to check terrestrial availability ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Pissed off with the whole UK broadband thing

"They could always move to somewhere that has fast internet."

Not always an option. Generally, poor internet speeds are encountered in rural areas (low population, lack of incentive to BT to upgrade), which generally don't have the higher wages required to make moving financially easy. I'm lucky insofar as I'm 50m from the cabinet and get 21Mb/s on ADSL (BT have no plans to upgrade that cabinet, btw). Someone 6 miles down the road from me is lucky to get 250Kb/s ... and BT have said they're not doing anything about that, as it's not financially viable.

[anthonyhegedus]

Re: Pissed off with the whole UK broadband thing

One of our customers gets 209kbps from time to time

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Pissed off with the whole UK broadband thing

Answer is obvious, only allow providers to charge for the service they actually provide based upon £/Mb and services provided.

I woulds also require that no new copper networks be allowed and any provider price increase much be only after an addition % of remaining unconnected population has joined the party.

Rural areas become as cheap as chips where they can't be bothered to upgrade the network and more expensive in the city where there are more options/competition to limit retail prices.

Problem solved with built in incentive for continued growth if the providers wish to increase their income, those that bring in new connections get to charge more and those that do not help to expand the network get what they deserve. I would also add that if they get a bung from the state then this does not count towards the provider growing the network

[Jimmy2Cows]

Re: Pissed off with the whole UK broadband thing

Yes indeed, prorate payment just like they do for their "up to" speed descriptions.

[Aristotles slow and dimwitted horse]

Which reminds me...

Which reminds me to threaten to leave VM once again to get a better deal. Sick to death with their quarterly price increases and no significant service improvement.

[IGotOut]

Re: Which reminds me...

Yes but you get a pointless speed increase "free" about the same time.

[BrownishMonstr]

Does average(mean/median/mode) salaries factor into this? If internet in CountryA costs twice as much as CountryB, but the average salary in CountryA is ten times as much, then the internet can possibly be considered cheaper in CountryA.

No?

[Anonymous Coward]

Romania, on the other hand, is liberally tossing 1Gbps

to those who are connactable. Which is, unsurprisingly, a tiny minority of the whole population. See, not too bad, UK! And you add BREXIT, we're positively ahead of the game, ANY game!

[IGotOut]

Apple and Pears

These surveys don't often show the full picture.

Take Romania. Yes they have very fast and cheap broadband, because of a few reasons.

1) Much if the infrastructure is brand new. You don't have deal with legacy ducts, pre-existing copper and other infrastructure, getting in the way.

2) Outside the major towns and cities, broadband is pretty non-existent.

We could have it quickly over here, but soon as you tell people you going to rip up a road for a week or two, install a huge box and maybe disrupt businesses for a few days, everyone is up in arms.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Apple and Pears

"Outside the major towns and cities, broadband is pretty non-existent." if you are only talking about wired connections, most of the people there that I know are on wireless and live out in the sticks

[Rich 11]

Horses for courses

and in Andorra you're looking at a measly $0.08.

Yeah, but Andorra is so small you could wire every house up with TokenRing.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Horses for courses

Isn't it up a mountain? Don't lose your ring in the fire!

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with these numbers is that they don't account for earnings in those countries. I pay under £10 a month for fast fibre to my home router, which is much cheaper and much faster than when I lived in the UK. But, the average salary where I live is less than £500 a month so suddenly that £10 is not so cheap looking. I'm sure that when I compare the earnings of my U.S. colleagues $50 over there isn't so bad. Happily I'm paid a decent multiple of our average salary.

[Anonymous Coward]

verizon just cut my FiOS bill

landline phone unlimited and gigabit internet for $89 / month with tax.

yes I am happy.

[Big_Boomer]

ByeByeBT

Having recently moved from Sky Fibre (36MB/s) to Virgin (200Mb/s) I can only extol the virtues of FTTP. It's rare that it drops below 200Mb/s and is substantially cheaper than what I paid for the BT OpenReach based Sky broadband for 5 times the bandwidth. Latency is also better at ~10ms (16ms for Sky) so it's all good. Pretty soon just about anyone who can will be switching to FTTP and everyone else will get left behind. Those left behind will soon start screaming and that (along with decreasing income) may finally motivate BT OpenReach to get off their arse and upgrade their network. I know it is happening but too slowly and if BT hadn't dragged their feet for the last 20 years, they could have been market leaders by now. Instead they are now the also-rans and soon will become a footnote in history if they don't get their finger out, PRONTO!!

[Anonymous Coward]

BT dragging their feet for 20 years

BT have been dragging their feet since they were privatized simply because that was how to get a free bung from the Gov.

BT in theory should be the cheapest since they never had to put their own network in

[fibrefool]

Virgin "FTTP"

You do know Virgin is HFC, not FTTP, right?

So fibre to a street cabinet and coax from there.

granted coax beats voice-grade twisted pair (hence their being able to offer faster speeds than OpenReach FTTC and with none of the "up to" malarkey).

Also cable has more upgrades to come. DAA (Distributed Access Architecture) moves the DOCSIS PHY from the head-end to the cabinet and so improves your SNR (so you'll get higher levels of QAM) while making node splits easier (so fewer users share the same bandwidth). And given a "Node+0" setup (no amplifiers between the cabinet and the home) you can do things like full-duplex and/or extended spectrum (both are part of DOCSIS 4.0).