Byers Green, B4RN and Better news in 2012?

Tweet

Read more!

A quick summary of this week's events, and a seasonal greeting.....

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com


It would seem that community pressure does indeed force BT to succumb. Byer's Green, one of the villages visited by John Popham during Can't Get Online week, have been informed that, despite meeting none of BT's criteria for FTTC, the villagers are to receive the upgrade.

From The Byers Green Community Forum


Happy Christmas to all our readers.


Your Christmas present follows below.


"Following our recent meeting with BT Openreach a 'demand assessment' review of the Broadband take-up in Byers Green was commissioned. This has now been analysed by BT Openreach and they have determined that the demand is sufficient to justify the necessary investment to provide a 'fibre to cabinet' upgrade of the Byers Green service.

The current expectation is that this will be installed some time in mid 2012."


You made it possible.

The view here is that it's a shame that the community has not sought a more permanent solution that doesn't hand over all the money each month far into the future to BT, and that a community social enterprise could at least have re-spent the cash locally, but one can only hope that 100% of the community can be served with at least something better than that which is currently provided by the incumbent.

And if you are a community who has not yet been told there will be an upgrade of any flavour, Byer's Green should offer more than a glimmer of hope. And why not aim for the true target - FTTH? After all, if it doesn't prove within, say, three years that it will be viable to BT in the long-term.... well, let's say there would be some hats eaten!

B4RN

Yesterday, it was standing room only at the B4RN launch, with communities and organisations from all over the UK filling seats and floorspace, much to the bemusement of some local people who obviously hadn't quite grasped what a unique and interesting project B4RN is for so many around the country. The opening of the share offer is a major milestone for community FTTH, and 5TTH is proud to have been a part of making history. Not quite Fiver To The Home but as close as you are ever likely to come.

Barry Forde was as impressive as ever, and listening to him talking tech to Seb from ThinkBroadband during the post-event networking about Juniper, IX, etc etc was one of those moments that reinforces the conviction that B4RN is set on exactly the right route. Not a single negative report has come out. In fact, here are some of the blogs, stories, tweets etc so you can read all about it.

• Pauline Rigby (Optical Reflection) 
• BBC Radio Lancashire
• John's Popham's Live audiocast
• The tweets
• Brian Condon's Liveblog
• Rory Cellan-Jones on the BBC Technology blog
• Ian Grant on Broken Telephone
• ThinkBroadband

Letters, videos and tweets of support from the Duke of Westminster, the first Google Fiber city- Kansas, EU Commissioner Neelie Kroess, Andrew Stott (Director of Digital Engagement at the Cabinet Office), ECFiber in Vermont, Dave Isenberg, and many, many others show just how much goodwill there is towards the success of this project. And its success may well raise many questions about the BDUK process during 2012......

However, there are those for whom the green eyed monster is showing because this FTTH, community led, 100% community benefit solution is now fully underway. Disingenuous attempts to dissuade potential investors are unlikely to work though because this is a value for money, long-term (not interim) solution where the Management Team are absolutely determined that every penny that can will stay within the community. And as has been discovered elsewhere, once the fibre goes into the ground to the first few people, communities get IT.

Share application forms can be downloaded from http://www.b4rn.org.uk so get yourself a great Xmas pressie and Buy a Bit of B4RN!

Breaking News: as I type this, Broken Telephone has published the worrying story that the VOA may be likely to further hamper efforts to lay fibre unless you are BT with a story headlined "VOA ready to bung BT billions". Not such great news.

And Finally......

Many, many thanks to everyone for the support, stories, and comments to 5TTH. There will now be a period of radio silence as family and personal commitments take precedence, even for this obsessed one! Wishing you all a very happy Christmas and New Year and let's hope that 2012 sees much more in the way of progress towards FTTH in the UK, rural and urban. And especially from communities who should not be tied to the lengthy BDUK process, the incumbent or interim solutions, and who should be allowed to innovate and deliver unhindered by bureaucracy, greed and downright short-sightedness. See the light  xxLindsey

......walks away singing, "C'mon baby light my fibre"

Read more!

How low can we go, CEO of Geo?

Tweet

Read more!

Can you limbo? It is beginning to feel as if the bar is now perilously low to the ground and there are few sane folk left willing to sink to the depths of our apparently less than meagre national ambition to have the "best broadband infrastructure in Europe". (Yes, yes, hollow laughs all round at this seemingly ludicrous (cl)aim that is still being made in the face of so much fact-based evidence to the contrary).

Chris Smedley, CEO of Geo last week answered a few questions for 5tth about PIA, BDUK and the future, after the announcement that Geo were, sadly, dropping out of the BDUK process.

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com



There is not a single factor that is seeing off the valuable players in this game, nor is there out and out disagreement with PIA as a concept, rather it is the pricing and terms that are the issue. But the truth is that if you wanted to blame a single issue then PIA in its current form would be it. PIA has little to offer as a solution as it stands, and it is blowing business plans out of the water for UK broadband for our next generations. PIA needs serious work, or scrapping, so it seemed appropriate with all that is going on, or rather not going on, for a ditty to mark the occasion.



There has already been much said about Geo's departure, BDUK, the wisdom of the current approach of spending the money, PIA etc. For many, this departure by Geo feels like a tipping point. No longer is it just community folk, tech journos, and small players making a noise and querying what is actually being done in our name and with our money. Now the big guys are dropping out of BDUK, rural broadband, national and regional solutions etc and making it quite clear why.

LA: Is the BDUK process rescuable, or are we too far down the line of handing the money to BT?

Chris Smedley: That’s for Government and Ofcom (and maybe even BT) to decide. If BT voluntarily dropped the restrictions on PIA and BDUK quickly developed an alternative to the gap funding model then things could be turned round quite quickly. However, as we have asked for all these things already and been denied them on the basis that there is no demand from industry then I wouldn’t hold out too much hope. That means the much slower process of getting Ofcom to intervene on PIA and fibre leasing which will probably take two years to get clear pricing and fair terms for something we could all use as BT will when they deploy new fibre cables. I have no idea whether DCMS will ask BDUK to develop an alternative to the gap funding model. I think they should. I do find it difficult to see anyone other than BT winning the current pilots or the Next Generation Broadband Wales procurement as things stand.

LA: Chris, you must have done the numbers - what figures make it impossible for GEO? What is the gap?

Chris Smedley: Too difficult to generalise as each procurement was different. The simple facts are that using existing poles and ducts is about 5% of the cost of building a new network. Where they exist, other players simply have to be able to use them or it is impossible to compete against BT. If you can’t do so for the long distances to get to remote rural communities as the current PIA stops us from doing then we end up with a proportionately higher cost base than our main competitor for the longest parts of the network. If you then can’t use the new fibre cable to serve local businesses, the public sector, the mobile and wireless industries or other ISPs for backhaul then somewhere between 50-70% of the potential revenues in your business case are zeroed out. BT suffers from none of these restrictions (and has the lion’s share of the current market anyway) so it is easily going to be able to offer more “gap funding” than anyone else.

LA: What have BDUK said to you to make the decision to give up?

Chris Smedley: They have told us that they cannot address any of these concerns about PIA as they are the responsibility of the regulator, Ofcom. Ofcom have told us they are being considered within the Business Connectivity Market Review. This is currently due to conclude at the end of next year and then we will have to negotiate with BT a new contract – assume two years from now at current rate of progress – well after BDUK’s procurements will have concluded. They have told us that there is no demand (presumably other than us) for a non gap funded framework for bidders. Between them, they made our decision pretty easy in the end!

LA: Do you believe that councils could be illegally funding a furthering of a monopoly in 7-10 years' time through the BDUK procurement process?

Chris Smedley: I doubt it is illegal for them to choose BT through the BDUK procurement process – although if the European Commission do apply their state aid guidelines as they have said they will then you would expect no project to become operational unless it offers a fully unbundled dark fibre product to the rest of the market. BT won’t do this at the moment. The sad precedent is that when this got explored after the award to BT of the Cornwall project, Ofcom and Government supported a push back against the EU on this point, arguing (successfully) that this was a matter for the national regulator and that the chosen UK remedies were not unbundled fibre but PIA (!) and VULA (BT’s “virtually” unbundled service – whatever that means). We hear worrying noises from Ofcom that they are considering meeting the EU’s requirements for unbundling in the future with “wavelength unbundling”. For us, as a dark fibre operator, this is all nonsense. Optical fibre cables have lots of fibre in them. Unbundling is a simple lease of the sub-divided elements the market likes to buy (usually a pair).

(I'll put an intro to this next question as I have not blogged this yet. During our meeting with Jeremy Hunt recently here in Cumbria, John Colton of FibreGarden, one of the BDUK Technical Trials Pilots, raised the issue for consideration of a State Aid "premium". This would be for those going straight for the jugular and doing FTTH rather than interim solutions.

The BDUK money is currently being divvied up on a technology neutral basis with all solutions receiving the same per household however long the likely lifespan or suitability of the product, but this fails to appreciate that FTTH will need no further investment. The argument for a premium being that none of those communities/providers doing fibre with this round of money will require any upgrade dosh in the future, whereas all other solutions will be doing an Arnold Schwarzenegger impression. If we are to spend this money, surely we should spend it wisely?)

LA: Do you feel that fibre to the home is being penalised more than, say FTTC, BET, wireless?

Chris Smedley: Yes.

LA: On top of PIA costs, there is also fibre tax, and no premium is being paid to those willing to invest in the longer term rather than stop gap/interim solutions. Can this be rectified?

Chris Smedley: Easily by a determined government which REALLY wants to see fibre deployed across the UK.

LA: After Fujitsu making all the noise earlier this year, how do you feel about them being the first to work with BT on PIA? Stitched up?

Chris Smedley: We are still a PIA trialist and will remain so if possible as we are keen in the long-term to make PIA work. I have no idea why they think it is a good tactic to ignore the deficiencies in the current product and praise BT for launching the current limited product. You will have to ask them! [I will!]

LA: How can Geo now help communities (including councils) to ensure that the gap funding generates local profits as well as /instead of those for a private company?

Chris Smedley: We would have been happy to help by developing viable schemes for councils based on an alternative model to gap funding (like FibreSpeed). We wouldn’t ever have accepted the gap funding model. Going forward, we are going to be focusing on our core business and leaving this task to others (if there are any other than BT).

LA: Where do we go from here?

Chris Smedley: That’s now a question for Ofcom and Government, I’m afraid. Look at New Zealand would be my advice.

Many thanks to Chris for taking time out to answer my questions. It is undoubtedly way past time now for a long hard look at what route we are taking to achieve the goals required in this country. When such exciting companies as Geo and Vtesse are no longer available to innovate, inspire and connect the communities who so need the type of solutions that the agile, generous-spirited, imaginative yet profitable telcos (rather than the oil tanker behemoths) could deliver, summat 'as garn wrang, as they say round here.

Fujitsu & Friends, please stick it out. You are pretty much our only hope now to save this country from yet more global humiliation.




Read more!

True Cost of Copper Infrastructure - correction

Tweet

Read more! Suddenly remembered the other night that many moons ago I stood in a scrapyard next to a complex and expensive piece of machinery, feeding in bits of cable, and then took a large amount of copper granules to weigh-in in Leeds or somewhere over that way. The reason it had escaped my memory was that that was the beginning of a 3 day mission/adventure to Sussex via a circuitous route that included the wilds of Lincolnshire and a 1948 Leyland Beaver to pick up my 1966 Magirus Deutz. Which takes precedence over bags of copper in the memory stakes.

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com



However, it prompted a call to the scrapyard where that happened to get some grassroots information about this copper malarkey. "Hi, it's Lindsey. Where would I find out accurate prices for copper?" "You'd ring me." "Err, yeah, well, that's what I've done!"

"What copper?" "Well, it's BT's copper and there is rather a lot of it. Tonnes of it."

"Firstly, there is no way you can sell this to anyone without a certificate. No-one will touch it, well, no-one honest would. It's marked and traceable. To find out prices you talk to LME or Simms here in the North but you can't deal direct with them with BT copper straight out of the ground."

This is where we had a lengthy conversation about the machinery I remembered. Not this model but a cable granulator, which crushes the components of the cable, separates it and sorts it, to get the highest grade of copper possible, which will in turn fetch the highest price.

And here comes the rub: "But BT copper is low grade. Really low grade. The lowest of the low. It is made up of lots of fine copper wires and needs plenty of work to get anything useful from it. In fact, you'd be lucky to get, um, a grand a tonne."

(The 'um' was telling. Bear in mind, this is a successful businessman who makes his money out of scrap so you can choose your percentage to add on to that for what he gets for it!)

"How much have you got?"

I've known this guy a long time and he knows full well I would not have stolen anything, so there was no point stringing him along with answers like 10 million tonnes so I said, "It's not actually mine..."

"Don't get involved, it's not even worth the hassle for the price you can get for it, especially if there are no certificates from BT saying you have permission to recycle it. The only way to make anything back from it is if it's yours ie if you are BT, and if you have access to a granulator [Which is a £20k+ piece of kit] and have someone like me to process and trade it for you."

So, a quick back of the envelope calculation says that to someone like me with a few tonnes of the stuff, selling it through my mate the scrapman who is going to take his margin, we are down to £10bn instead of £50bn. Which shows just how unreliable both El Reg and the Telegraph articles were in getting to the nitty gritty.

It's still one helluva lot of money to have in the ground hindering progress, especially when you think that the readjusted figure for ubiquitous FTTH across the whole of the UK is now between £10 and £14bn. BT are apparently putting in £2.5bn to do Infinity, Fujitsu want to spend £1.5bn, and companies such as Iuhba are threatening to spend another £1.5bn etc. Either my maths is very poor or those three companies plus weighing in the copper could see us fibred to the home UK-wide.

(Not that I am suggesting we pursue this route of allowing a handful of companies to do it and own it all as I remain convinced that open access is the *only* way forward for this country and others, but I'm just pointing out that the figures stack!)
Read more!

The True Cost of Britain's Copper Infrastructure I

Tweet

Read more!

(Written on an iPhone, uploaded from home, apologies for typos)

This headline grabbed my eye as I waited for the train at King's Cross today: "Lives at risk as thieves disconnect 999 services. Metal gangs target communication cables". Not one to purchase The Times normally (ever), I succumbed. (It's a long way back home with only 15 minutes free wifi and patchy mobile coverage all the way up the East Coast mainline.)

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com



We've done, over and over again, the reasons why FTTH makes sense from a consumer, business, public sector, community, economic and environmental point of view, and why the copper needs pulling out the ground sooner rather than later. Jeremy Hunt was quite clear during his visit at Rheged last week that this government understands the need for Fibre To The Home - in fact, he was quite clear that he didn't want to hear that argument again from ECCBF! However, we all know that we are being held hostage to the business plans and shareholder interest of private companies and that must stop. So, to keep the pressure on, let's do what all scientific journals, media and tabloids etc do and make copper the big scare story for people's health and lives.

The theft of copper cables has so far, this year alone, caused 240,000 minutes of delays on Network Rail. Apparently, these thefts have cost Network Rail £43M over the last 2 years, but no doubt this fails to take into account copper stolen from railways such as Tickhill that NR were planning to re-open. There is no indication how much the train delays have cost British businesses with staff being late, missed appointments, lost productivity etc, let alone the long-term losses from visitors to this country (tourism brings in at least £10bn p.a.) who hesitate to return, and don't ....

The figure given for cost of all copper theft, not just from railways, is given as more than £1 billion per year. (It seems to be rising fast as last year it was estimated at £770M per year) That £1 billion probably fails to fully take into account many hidden losses e.g to homes, families, SMEs, SOHOs etc etc when the communication network and infrastructure relying on copper fails.

Britain has an estimated 20-25 million tonnes of installed copper, approx 60-65% of which is thought to be cables and wires, according to this article. (Remarkably similar figures to El Reg article which looked specifically at BT's copper) At £4350 per tonne scrap value, (down from £5k on El Reg 2 months ago but expected to rise continuously into 2015) the cables would appear to be worth at least £52 billion taking the lower estimates alone.

Now, it's difficult to know whether all of that could be replaced with fibre but it's not hard to guess that a vast majority could be - discounting the power cables, but these would seem to be a small part of the actual copper plant. However, here we stumble on an issue that this post would like to make more of than Fiona Hamilton and John Simpson did.

The emergency services, for instance, often become a victim of these thefts, not necessarily because they are connected to the copper directly, but because of the process known as "overlay". This is where a telco e.g BT does not pull out obsolete or even broken infrastructure, which adds additional cost to a job unless you factor in the resale value of what you have pulled out the ground; the telco simply overlays the new cabling on the old. Leaving the copper as an attractive target for theft whilst making the newer infrastructure closer to the surface doubly vulnerable.

Ironically, as an aside, some places have had to suffer the ignominy of copper overlay (onto fibre) because of BT's insistence to use the ADSL product instead of the more advanced FTTH, that would have been feasible over the fibre if it wasn't for asset sweating. This begins to seem as much a backward, greedy step as a total liability.

Copper thefts are occurring at a rate of 700 incidents per month against the energy industry, 8 attempts daily on the railways, and enough against BT's own network to see a special task force launched (imaginatively named the OpenReach Metal Theft Taskforce).

To date, no innocent person has been recorded as being killed, although at least 6 people have been electrocuted on railways during thefts. One can only imagine the circumstances that have led to these people taking to crime, but no doubt their families feel the effects of their deaths as much as any other family would. The fact is that 6 lives have now been lost, and many more will be if this continues. Not just of criminals but from rail or air accidents, emergency services' disruption etc.

Additionally, as with all such crimes, it is not always possible to be aware of just how far the ripples spread to affect the innocent, and a 36 hour outage for the Solent Coastguard and a 999 outage in Wiltshire recently could easily have caused problems, if not deaths, as a direct or indirect consequence. Cabling stolen from an Air Traffic upgrade at Stansted recently ought to bang home how potentially serious these thefts could become if there was any failure for air traffic control.

Whilst the Private Member's Bill to be tabled on Tuesday addresses the sale of such copper, it fails to address the real issue which is

why the copper is even still there in the vast majority of cases.

Especially a) in the 21st century, when it is well past its sell by date and usefulness except for BT shareholders b) when it is worth so much more out if the ground than in and c) when sentences for nicking copper are so light as to not put anyone off.

Surely, in light of comments such as that by Luke Beeson, general manager of BT security:

"It's only a matter of time, I think, before we unfortunately get a fatal incident"

it is time for BT et al to step up to their corporate responsibility to limit the chance of loss of human life by the continuing existence of a 19th/20th century temptation for crooks when it needn't, and shouldn't, be there.

As well as further cost, inconvenience and damage to UK Plc and its citizens by the very existence of copper in the ground instead of fibre, there should be an urgent move to force the hand of these companies to remove as much of the source of the problem as possible. Particularly now serious crime gangs have their eyes on that £52 billion+ of copper wire in order to commit a crime which is now described as the most serious threat to UK railways after terrorism. Action taken to prevent threats to the personnel of the emergency services should also be extended to safeguard the infrastructure which brings the blue lights to our homes and businesses when required. Before more people die unnecessarily.


Read more!

BT's misleading community flyer and website

Tweet

Read more!

Here we go again. BT are putting out misleading info to community groups and the frustrated folk in rural areas who are desperate for broadband. Does it count as an advert, in which case do we report it to the ASA? Or if not, who do we report it to in order to prevent this from being disseminated across communities nationwide without a major rewrite by Westhill and BT?

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com



For those of us who have been in this game since prior to broadband becoming a household word, this is like Groundhog Day. Same old, same old. But if you don't know what BT are capable of, you might fall for this.

Firstly, spot the 'may' in the first sentence. Yep, same as ever. Gives a nice fallback once your community has done everything in its power to hand over money, goodwill, wayleaves, effort etc to BT who will come back with, "We only said superfast broadband 'may' come to you". And note the failure to make any promises or define 'superfast' either because BT have resorted to all the 'up to' malarkey again....

"Working on behalf of the communications industry..." Really? Not on behalf of BT shareholders then? Or even the apparently non-important communities and citizens BT ought to at least be pandering to considering what BT are asking/expecting from us?

The purple section is probably the most offensive. Initially I thought that that little asterisk after "hundreds of Communications Providers" would actually reveal that there will not be much of a choice of communications providers offering BT Infinity or superfast services, but, oh no, apparently this snippet of info about how much choice you will have is deemed too highbrow for the community folk in rural areas. No, let's treat you all as morons and explain what a communications provider is - like the clue is not in the name.

There is no small print pointing out that what OpenRetch are actually asking is "EVERYTHING" from your community - free wayleaves, you ask for the money from Government or your neighbours and hand it to BT, you dig, you get out there and do all BT's community engagement and advertising for free, and then, wahoo, BT will bill you every month for a BT service badged up by one of the CPs (that's someone who even provides TV services to your home in case you didn't know) reselling BT products. Nope, let's gloss over that aspect. Nothing pointing out that BT are not the only ones able to help you solve the problem caused by BT's continuing failure over the years to actually nail, and solve, the problem caused by um that'll be BT. Anyone remember the trigger level campaigns? Yep, we've been here before.....but this time BT want much, much more from YOU.

This is not BT 'working with your community' at all. This is BT getting you to hand them everything on a plate to continue their incumbent monopoly into the future, without any level of commitment from them to actually deliver superfast, or to pay for wayleaves, or to make a deal with the community that, say, 'in return for your commitment, we will make a contribution to your community project, coffers etc...'. Oh no, take, take, take, as ever.

And as for the last bit of this sentence: that is one helluva (unproven) claim to be making.

Aha, but spot the anomaly. Re-read the first line. Only 'most'? But you say we can do all of it, precisely when we want to do it. So, which do you mean? We can do it when we want? Or we can't? Or we may be able to?

If your community gets these fliers, send one copy to the Advertising Standards Agency and one to Ofcom, asking them to look carefully at them and then rap BT's knuckles with a hefty fine for pointing people to a website which makes claims in the first paragraph alone which many in rural areas will find deeply offensive considering BT's failure to deliver on its promises/commitments from 2003-2004 onwards. And for which it was paid handsomely from the public coffers.

Oh no we bloody can't. We can't even 'work occasionally' on the substandard service you are selling and reselling to millions of rural people across this fair nation. There should be a massive asterisk on that paragraph that points people to an explanation that actually this paragraph doesn't apply to at least third of the country as well as many in urban areas.

And Ofcom need to look hard at the page about the providers currently offering superfast on the website. Virgin Media? Rutland Telecom? Be? Oh, you mean "reselling BT's definition of 'superfast'? Well, make that clear then.

(As today has seen editing control by BT on even BBC web pages, I'll just include a screen shot of those two pages so the more bored amongst you can monitor when it changes to fact rather than very poorly worded, ill thought-out and misleading marketing hype)

It will be interesting to see when a new version appears, and whether those communities who have already received this flier will be sent an amended version to ensure that they are not talking to their communities without understanding the reality of what this flier/advert is asking of them. Many communities do not have broadband champions who are up to speed with what choices are available for rural areas, and it would be more than just remiss of BT to attempt to capitalise on that. It's morally outrageous, but in addition, if it doesn't fall under existing laws about private companies misleading the public, I'd be very surprised.




Read more!

Workington, working together?

Tweet

Read more! BT will shortly announce that they have just cherry picked Workington out of Cumbria's roll out. They may have made the announcement already....been busy here.....

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com



This county that I and others choose to live in is being scammed. Big style. As are far too many others. (Or prove us wrong?). Not for the BDUK money per se but for the townships which would then make a rural rollout actually worth playing with. Using the BDUK procurement as a backdrop.

Apparently C&W, who didn't actually show at the suppliers' day in Carlisle recently, are backing out. Read: have left. So, we're down to two players (waiting for confirmation but that isn't due till about next spring) and word on the street is that someone high up in HMG is trying to keep BT's monopoly alive and well. Like that comes as a surprise.

There are questions that need asking at County level about the fitness of some of those making telecom decisions for our next generations. But ask yourself in far more depth and detail what the hell is going on in Westminster that yet another County is down to only (in reality) a single player with two initials?

Yes, a register is required of lobbyists but how about a list of every single ex-BT employee and shareholder who seems to be currently involved in some very poor decision making for the future communications infrastructure of this country?

Hey, we get the need for commercial cut throat games, but why not put in open access infrastructure and then let them chop chunks out of each other?




Read more!

Is Cumbria JFDI? Part 1

Tweet

Read more! Spent most of yesterday at Stoneybeck Inn near Penrith at a community and suppliers day organised by East Cumbria Community Broadband Forum (ECCBF) and BDUK, and MCed by Rory Stewart and Libby Bateman. I'm not sure what the other BDUK recipient areas are doing, and would welcome updates from anyone who is aware of the forward motion elsewhere, but here is a summary of yesterday in the Cumbria Community broadband world.

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com



 It may be a recession, but many community people managed to take a day away from work to partake in this event. There were also a substantial number of supplier representatives there, whose offerings range from the whole caboodle through to component parts or services, including BT, Fujitsu, Cable and Wireless, MiniFlex, AFL, Commendium, NextGenUs, Ericsson, and included the majority of those on the procurement short list. Cumbria County Council and CLEO were also represented.

My overall impression is that these structured yet informal events not only bring out the best in people, (as do the colloquia) but also see far more forward motion than a simple talking heads do, such as the vast majority of conferences end up being. Without being party to many of the commercially sensitive discussions which were undoubtedly ongoing during the event, it seemed that the sales pitches went far beyond "this is our standard offering" because the communities have well-developed visions of precisely what their communities want. There is going to have to be a shift towards the centre ground, of compromise, and this event definitely seemed to be pushing things in the right direction by both 'sides'.

Thinking of it is as "them and us" (suppliers and communities) is however inappropriate as it is clearly obvious that what are being developed are partnerships. BDUK and the County Council have made it clear that suppliers are going to have their work cut out ensuring that whatever is delivered involves the communities to whatever level each community wishes to be involved. Whilst what is being built must be commercially sustainable, it also has to suit the communities at least as much as it suits the suppliers. Collaboration and co-operation are the watchwords here.

So, the suppliers, including BT, were "harangued" in the nicest possible way by Rory Stewart MP to contribute, talk to the communities represented, and work together towards the common goal that is next gen broadband across Cumbria using the recently announced £16.4M, the immense goodwill and passion exhibited at Rheged, Great Asby and other recent events, as well as the existing assets in Cumbria, such as CLEO (the education network).

Several communities had been chosen to give updates on their progress and outline their thinking, both to share what was being considered around the county and also to assist the suppliers in considering where and how they could assist in achieving the goals being set by the communities. Fibre GarDen, Great Asby, Eden Valley Digital, Grange and Cartmel LAP, and Northern Fells all gave presentations.


Different scenarios were defined prior to the meeting:

• The quest for community backhaul solutions
• Solutions for demand aggregation
• Build and Benefit schemes
• Community Data Books

For many, the backhaul issue is still one of the most thorny. Cost by length, firstly, means that for many rural communities the cost of even a limited feed can be exorbitant. The difference in cost between a 100Meg feed and a 1Gig feed is actually minimal, but for most communities the cost of such a feed means the business plan is unnecessarily hard to resolve. Backhaul players need to start thinking more clearly about whether they want one big customer - a community, or no customer at all.

Obvious solutions are using existing feeds in the community - NHS, public sector, schools, libraries etc, but once again we are back to a medley of red herrings - security, contract will not permit sharing, and general faffing by telcos who sometimes would seem to prefer that half the country remains disconnected rather than think out of the box and use existing capacity with a novel approach. 

There are other solutions which were mentioned at more length in the networking sessions e.g. railways - Network Rail, Global Crossing, and smart grid solutions using assets of Electricity North West. The difficulties with all of these seem to be completely surmountable IF the above companies and organisations stop prevaricating and help solve the problems. Doing so would create win-win situations all round, and it is time for these bodies to get with IT and get out from behind the buffers. Network Rail should remember who paid for the fibre assets on the railway line in the first place!! Joined up thinking is not that difficult and many of the problems the larger organisations cannot see solutions to simply require a brief chat with one of the many community people who have thought through all the possible solutions to assess the best approach.

Much more to say, so am going to write this as a multi-part post. (And hope that Blogger's photo app starts working again before I finish!

Read more!

BT: 100meg symmetrical..It's just not (their) cricket....

Tweet

Read more!

If it wasn't so sad, it'd be funny. Community network put in a 100Meg symmetrical backhaul, announce its usage for a livestream of a village cricket match....BT spam the village with A3 posters....
This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com



Bear in mind, this is a 7 year story so we'll keep it to the last month alone.

@johnpopham, talking to @danslee, realised that there is a need to bring people into community events needing tech. The event in question became Wray's Easter weekend cricket match, livestreamed over the Wray network. Wray has a symmetrical broadband connection, provided by Lancaster Uni. Most communities, unless they have a Digital Village Pump, can only dream of this type of community activity because the major supplier of backhaul hate the idea you could be a content provider....

It hit Twitter. As an idea. But Twitter ideas become real in moments. Even @stephenfry tweeted it. (Just like @yokoono did with Quakebook - Buy it now, please).

BT have just hit Wray with an A3 poster dissing wireless connections.

Coincidence?




Read more!

Two Leetle Questions for BT.....

Tweet

Read more! At times, it is difficult to comprehend why telcos and incumbents do what they do, say what they say. So....here's a coupla questions.............
This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com



1. BT plan to upgrade "up to 80% of their copper network to deliver connections of up to 20Mbps by the end of the year?"

Our question to BT: how many up to's can you get in one sentence? What do these "up tos" mean, after Ofcom has told telcos to stop using the term? What precisely are you trying to achieve? Both separately and together, with your Up Tos? For consumers? For your network? For Ofcom's plans and regulations? IN REALITY?

2. When you announce FTTC connectivity to market towns, are you planning to connect 100% of cabinets in those areas, wherever existing infrastructure lies? Are up to 100% FTTC areas 100% connected, and to what? How do you define when an area is "FTTP connected?" Do you think you can make it up by connecting one house from one cab = FTTP from that street cabinet?






Read more!

Dirty tricks? Again. Have we learnt nowt?

Tweet

Read more! As regular readers know, there have been hints and gripes (to put it mildly!) about some of what appears to have been going on. Recently and not so recently - these are not new occurrences. However, only yesterday on Twitter, we hit the target: "At what point do we stop allowing corporates to ruin communities' present & future well-being'? That is the crux of the matter. It is relevant at a nuclear, micro, regional, national and international level. This press release has just arrived to re-inforce our fears about rural broadband in the UK.

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com

The view taken from the Surrey Hills overlooking Ewhurst by this blogger on a recent trip to understand the issues for myself.

I could link a 5tth blog post to nearly every sentence of this PR, but will resist. The one link that is in place is, IMHO, the most important.

We have given control of broadband decision making and spending to entirely the wrong authorities. And we (civil servants, consumers, government ministers - in truth, everyone) have allowed corporates to corrupt the process. We will live to regret this enormously, UNLESS we accept our mistake and change the process IMMEDIATELY.


The press release is quoted below, verbatim:

FEARS are growing that hopes of providing fast broadband speeds in Ewhurst will be crushed.

The organisation established to bring the area out of the technological stone age is worried the plans will fall victim to British Telecom (BT).

Ewhurst & Surrey Hills Broadband (ESHB) believes that it is now the pawn in a "broadband improvement funding power struggle" between BT and Surrey County Council’s economic partnership.

ESHB was granted £150,000 by SEEDA (the South East England Development Agency [previously the lead agency for broadband in the UK - Ed]) for the purpose of providing better broadband to Ewhurst.

Shortly before the contract was to be signed in February, though, SEEDA withheld the grant until an announcement had been made.... "in a few days, which may affect the outcome".

Supporters of the Ewhurst scheme believe that BT, which did not provide a valid quotation during the tender process, has now told SEEDA and the county council that it will be upgrading Cranleigh and Ewhurst for fibre to the cabinet (FTTC) and therefore there is no need for the grant to be paid.

"In theory, this is good news for both Cranleigh and Ewhurst because public money need not be spent on the project," said a spokesman for ESHB.

"However, BT has a history of saying that it will upgrade areas as soon as local groups show signs of doing the work themselves, thus blocking projects - and then BT not doing, or postponing, the work.

"Could this be yet another example of a spoiling tactic simply to block the competition with a diminished or downgraded facility solution?"

A particular challenge for Ewhurst results [are] from the long lines from the cabinet to the homes of those living in the Surrey Hills, which BT acknowledge are of poor broadband quality.

They will experience an extremely slow broadband speed even with FTTC.

To meet this challenge, the Ewhurst group wanted to use the promised enabling grant for a fully flexible enhanced solution from its chosen contractor, Vtesse Networks Limited to achieve its aims.

These include techniques to improve the very poor lines and the installation of some fibre to the premises.

"By contrast, the BT cabinets will have no such facilities, thus condemning the outlying homes irrevocably to exclusion for generations to come," said the spokesman.

He said the situation had been complicated by the entry of the county council with fledgling organisations that stand to "inherit" potential SEEDA monies left after the organisation is abolished.

The withheld Ewhurst grant would provide a useful pot of money for the county’s objectives of eventually providing some broadband improvement to Surrey generally, but not on outlying lines as long as those around Ewhurst, he said.

"EHSB has put in a great deal of time and energy into this project and now see it going down the drain through devious tactics," said the group’s spokesman.

He pointed out that ESHB had raised the Cranleigh and Ewhurst profile to the extent that it had at least been considered by BT, even though BT had confirmed in writing last March that it had no such plans.

"Should the grant not be forthcoming to Ewhurst then Surrey must be obliged to ensure that BT provide a full facility universal service throughout the Ewhurst area within a reasonable time-scale and without the slippages that have occurred in other areas such as Haslemere and Brookwood," said the ESHB spokesman.

"If the ‘Big Society’ is to work and innovative schemes such as that of ESHB are to succeed, then the dead hand of big business and county authorities must be removed and local initiatives allowed to thrive," he added.

An announcement from BT that it would be providing FTTC in Cranleigh and Ewhurst was expected last week, but never materialised, and is now anticipated next week adding two more months delay.

Are we willing to allow this to continue throughout another decade? We have waited throughout the Noughties for the most basic broadband connections that copper and ADSL will allow, from the incumbent. Despite assurances that 99+% of the country can get it, the truth is plain to see in the very many letters to MPs, media, and ISPs. That 99% figure is, quite simply, A LIE.

The Final Third is now not just waiting for next gen, it is still waiting for a 20th century USC. Most other countries find our USC 'aspiration' - 2Mbps asymmetric - utterly laughable. Most consumers find it desperately frustrating that there appears to be no-one willing to take their side in 'authority', and those who are doing their utmost to resolve this are undermined by the very councils elected, and paid, to look after community well-being.



Enough is enough.
Read more!

The Telegraph broadband debate

Tweet

Read more! In case you missed it...here it is in full (courtesy of the Telegraph and the internet)

This blog post can be read at 5tth.blogspot.com




Matt Warman:
Hello and welcome to our broadband debate - check back here from 1pm for our panellists' views. You can also use the twitter #bbdebate, and feel free to submit your questions beforehand too
11:59
WhichTech:
Join the LIVE broadband debate at http://go.which.co.uk/i6Lab1 from 1pm as Which? expert Ceri Stanaway talks BB speed & reach #bbdebate [via Twitter]
12:05
yarwell:
Typical, invited to free lunch that clashes with http://j.mp/gVcIzY #bbdebate [via Twitter]
12:11
yarwell:
#bbdebate I wonder why <3% of Virgin Media cable customers take their 50Mbits/s service ? [via Twitter]
12:18
alwarman:
Is the Telegraph Live Broadband Debate autopublishing any tweets with this hashtag, I wonder... http://bit.ly/e8vPMA #BBdebate [via Twitter]
12:34
timmay2:
20 mins until #bbdebate [via Twitter]
12:42

Comment From PhilT
I can download at about 700 kbytes/s and upload 85 kbytes/s (5800 / 685 connection) I'm 1.5 miles from my village exchange, BT services only. It's adequate for now, but faster would be nice.
12:44

Comment From MrSaffron
As an opener - consider this, has the 2015 USC/Best Broadband date actually acted to delay improvements, since schemes/firms may now be waiting to see if they can get some BDUK funding.
12:44

Comment From PhilT
Do we have the commitment to ensure that every single household can get online at a connection speed of 2Mbits/s, and the funding and other mechanisms to deliver that ?
12:45

Comment From Lily Haigh
Do you think it’s important to publish the real world speeds your customers receive?
12:45

Comment From Dorothy Hornby
Question for the ISPs on the panel - Don't you think it's misleading to have "up to speeds" in your advertising?
12:45

Matt Warman:
Ten minutes to go and our panel is nearly all logged on - let us know any further questions before we start the introductions
12:52
AsamAhmad:
.@yarwell #bbdebate actually 1 in 3 people signing up to VM now take 20Mb/30Mb or 50Mb; the appetite for faster BB is definitely growing [via Twitter]
12:52
AsamAhmad:
@yarwell @alwarman sure, but with online video & multiple connected devices in the home, the need for bandwidth is only increasing #bbdebate [via Twitter]
12:59
WhichTech:
Put your #broadband questions to the panel (incl Which? expert Ceri Stanaway) now at http://go.which.co.uk/i6Lab1 #bbdebate [via Twitter]
1:00

Matt Warman:
And we're about to get going here...
1:00

Matt Warman:
Hello and welcome - we're going to go round our panel who will introduce themselves.
1:01

Matt Warman:
Let's start with Sam from SamKnows...
1:02
alwarman:
@yarwell @asamahmad Perhaps only 118000 people are on Virgin 50Mbps broadband because it costs £35pm and most don't need the speed!#BBdebate [via Twitter]
1:02

Matt Warman:
Next we'll be hearing from BT, then Louis Mosley and then from Virgin Media...
1:03

Sam Crawford:
Hello, I'm Sam Crawford from SamKnows and we provide the technology used by Ofcom and many others to measure broadband performance
1:03
martynsaville:
RT @WhichTech: Put your #broadband questions to the panel (incl Which? expert Ceri Stanaway) now at http://go.which.co.uk/i6Lab1 #bbdebate [via Twitter]
1:04

Matt Warman:
Thanks Sam. Next up Tim from BT...
1:04

Tim O'Sullivan:
Hello, I'm Tim O'Sullivan, director of public affairs at BT. As a company we're investing heavily in broadband services and are also one of the country's largest ISPs.
1:04

Louis Mosley:
Hi, I'm Louis Mosley. I work for Rory Stewart, MP for Penrith and the border in Cumbria. I'm answering questions on his behalf, answers on anything rural and broadband...
1:05

Duncan Higgins:
Hi, my name is Duncan Higgins and I look after the Broadband product at Virgin Media. I look forward to an interesting discussion.
1:05

Matt Warman:
And we're also joined by Ceri from Which? who will be logging on shortly.
1:05

Matt Warman:
Our first question for panellists and readers: is Britain's broadband speed and reach lagging too far behind our European colleagues for the nation's economic health?
1:06
JohnHamlett:
RT @WhichTech: Put your #broadband questions to the panel (incl Which? expert Ceri Stanaway) now at http://go.which.co.uk/i6Lab1 #bbdebate [via Twitter]
1:06

Ian Twinn:
Hallo I am from the advertiser representative body - ISBA
1:06

Comment From Jeff
Need to consider Local Loop Unbundling as well. I get so fed up of all these "great offers" that appear - none of which apply to my local exchange - Meltham as it's not unbundled!
1:07

Comment From MrSaffron
Does the panel know of a country where broadband speeds are uniformly good across the whole country? Does the UK by appearing to aim for a mediocre nationally available service, risk stifling innovation in the densely populated areas.
1:07
yarwell:
@asamahmad nice spin there. Still 3% of users on 50M ! #bbdebate [via Twitter]
1:07

Comment From Polchraine
Would all of the service providers - including Virgin be prepared to accept a Universal Service Obligation to provide a minimum 10Mbps speed to almost any property in the UK utilising their own network? Obviously there would need to be some small conditions such as "any Property" meaning one that is within 10km of a town or village with a population of 100 or more.
1:07

Matt Warman:
And if we look at Britain's 2015 target from universal service, do our readers and our panel think it will be enough? And will it actually happen by 2015 at all?
1:09

Duncan Higgins:
Interesting question. Once Virgin Media completes its 100Mb roll-out to half the country then we will be 6 years ahead of the EU target for ultra-fast Broadband in the UK. So, we are certainly playing our part in ensuring that the UK remains at the forefront.
1:09

Comment From Guest
Committing to 2MB or 4MB is counter productive - we need a system that is future proof.
1:09
cyberdoyle:
.@jeznowhouse hashtag looks to be #bbdebate not #bblive - my mistake http://tinyurl.com/4pyb2wp #digitalbritian [via Twitter]
1:09

Comment From Peter
Clearly 10M must be the minimum. How can this be rolled out to virtually all premises?
1:09

Tim O'Sullivan:
The UK is actually very well positioned on broadband availability and take up. Competition and consumer choice has driven this and those conditions should be kept in mind in the debate about rollout of higher seed fibre services (whihc will be critical to the UK keeping ahead of the game and maintaining its international competitiveness).
1:09

Comment From Alan
two questions from me please: firstly, is it right that I pay the same broadband charge for sub-1MB broadband speed in the country as is paid for 20MB in cities. Secondly, how can rural roll out best be funded to prevent rural areas being prevented from hosting modern businesses by broadband speed?
1:09

Comment From Louis61fp
I’m looking forward to getting fibre broadband but have seen that TalkTalk will only promise 15Mb on their fibre service. Why is theirs so much slower?
1:09

Comment From John Heart
Qu for Virgin - You advertise that your speeds are twice as fast as BT and Sky, but is this not misleading when you cannot offer these speeds right across the UK? Many of us are unable to get cable services, but you still claim ‘typical’ speeds of nearly 10Mb which we simply cannot achieve. What are your typical speeds for people without cable, and what plans do you have to roll out your cable services to the rest of the UK?
1:09

Louis Mosley:
Reach is very important. We musn't leave rural areas behind. The more remote a community, the more it stands to benefit from superfast broadband.
1:10

Comment From cyberdoyle
Question: Is it fair to use public funding to patch up an obsolete copper network when it will only be a temporary solution? Isn't it better to get fibre out to the rural areas and let the people dig to the digital village pumps and build their own networks either with fibre or wireless? Won't this stimulate investment in fibre to the home in urban areas and make this country lead the world? Rather than patching up copper which can never be classed as next generation access...
1:10

Sam Crawford:
Regarding Matt's question, Europe is a mixed bag much like the UK. We often hear of countries offering 100Mbps services, but they have similar universal service issues as we do here. Agreed with Louis - expanding reach of new services
is a critical issue.
1:11

Matt Warman:
Lots of readers talking about public subsidies for broadband roll-out? Is the Government's £830m going to be sufficient for a 100% service commitment? Really? And what does 100% mean in practice?
1:11

Comment From Peter
BT have stated that they will roll out to 66% of the population, when will the full list, including cabinet areas, be announced. Without this communities are unable to consider alternatives.
1:11

Tim O'Sullivan:
Currently approximately 89% of households can access 2mg services. It is important that the general agreement about this being the minimum speed most people can expect is built into plans for the use of government money and rolling out higher speed services.
1:12

Ceri Stanaway:
Hello, this is Ceri from Which? - delighted we've got over the technical hitch that's been stopping me logging in.
1:12

Comment From Guest
i will pay £35pm if it was available in my area
1:12

Duncan Higgins:
The decision around the USO needs to be carefully linked in with the desire for the extension of super-fast speeds in the UK. There will likely be areas where 2Mb is the target but we need a joined up conversation on how super fast roll out and the USO best fit together.
1:12
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate £530m now, and another £300 after 2015 if I recall. Enough for 2Meg if satellite used in costly areas [via Twitter]
1:12

Comment From cyberdoyle
hashtag for this event? #bblive going out on twitter now.
1:12

Matt Warman:
@cyberdoyle try #bbdebate
1:12

Comment From hannah stewart
What do you expect some of the end uses of higher speed broadband to be, beyond consumption of media
1:12

Comment From pete
when you live in the outer reaches of the Wild West - Shropshire - with no chance of any access to broadband other than at warp speed 512kbps.. any disacussion about the future of broadband seems a trifle redundant unless it includes the million slike me in this country who are - for the foreseeable future - condemned to be xcluded from what is taken for granted in metropolitan land ! Any comments , please and /or hope for the future ?? (We in our little hamlet cant even use the BBC i-Player our connection is so slow !!!)
1:12

Comment From Ms Taylor
Why do you think promoting UK average speeds are more accurate than telling customers the ‘up to’ speeds they can get in their area backed up with a personal speed estimate for their individual line, when most customers across the UK do not get anything like these average speeds, particularly in the outlying locations served by other provider networks?
1:13

Ceri Stanaway:
My thoughts on whether the 2Mbps universal service commitment is 'enough' depends on exactly what 2Mbps means. Will it mean that customers WILL be able to get 2Mbps all of the time, or will it be a maximum speed that can drop to 0.5Mbps or less some of the time. It's not clear from the government's proposals.
1:13

Tim O'Sullivan:
On BT's fibre rollout plans, we are announcing location where we will bring fibre services on a rolling basis. This is a significant rollout programme. we are currently connecting over 80k premises a week. Given the size of this project we are taking a phased approach to announcing the areas we are going to. we are on course to cover 2 thirds by 2015
1:14

Matt Warman:
What does our panel think a good minimum broadband speed will be in 2015? And how about 2020 or beyond, with European ambitions for us to be up at 50% 100mb by then...
1:14

Comment From Darth_8
Why is it we pay for speeds that we are not receiving, isn't it like going to a shop and paying for 2 shoes and only receiving 1 shoe back.
1:14

Comment From Ed Hasan
I joined TalkTalk when I moved into my new house and was told that the speed will be increased to 10mb soon...soon never happened and so I swapped to Virgin where I get near as damn it 10mb. How can we stop this mis/promise selling?
1:14

Comment From Ryan
The advertised "up to" speeds of broadband are rarely achievable for the vast majority - would a pricing structure based on bandwidth encourage investment? In addition, do you think it fair that people with lower speeds pay the same as people with faster connections?
1:14

Comment From Martin
Why are we (the UK) so far behind many countries in our download and particulary upload speeds (which are usually capped) I get a reasonable download of about 6mb but my upload is capped at 448kbs of which I get only about 350kbs. We are ranked about 50th in the world which many third wordl countries being far ahead of us. Why?
1:14

Comment From Ralph
Just back from my flat in Buenos Aires...I get there 10 times more speed than my house in Crowborough. When will the UK get up to speed. I'm less than a mile from the exchange
1:14

Comment From cyberdoyle
Agree with Sam and Louis, it is vital to get fibre out to the hardest places with public money. Market forces will deliver the rest
1:14

Sam Crawford:
2015 will be a tough date to hit for universal service, and it's worth noting that the commitment is to provide superfast services to the "community", not necessarily the homes. There is still a lot yet to be fleshed out.
1:14
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate on the price versus speed, BT Wholesale changed in 2004 to usage being the cost driver, hence the 10/20/40GB package prices [via Twitter]
1:15

Duncan Higgins:
Hi John, the typical speeds that we publish are specific to our cable broadband product and we certainly intend to be as transparent as possible as we can be. We would strongly encourage other ISPs to follow our lead and give their customers the real information they deserve.
1:15

Matt Warman:
We should look at advertising too, as some readers are: will companies still be advertising 'up to' speeds in 2015?
1:15

Comment From Janet Hanley
I agree with Dorothy Hornby. "up to speeds" are misleading. Consumers need to know what the real performance is that they are receiving. We are trying to bring social media to bear on the problem of broadband consumer empowerment.
1:15

Comment From Mark Mitchell
Please can someone explain why Hull one of the UK's largest cities is stuck with a single and poorly performing Internet supplier(Karoo) - why don't the other companies move into Hull? You would immediately gain tens of thousands of customers.
1:15

Comment From Peter
re question from Ceri - is 2M a guaranteed connection speed or throughput, very different?
1:15

Ceri Stanaway:
Currently, I reckon a reliable 2Mbps is enough for many people - it's enough for BBC iPlayer, for example, and plenty if all you want to do is email and browse the internet. But think back 10 years and most people were satisfied with dial-up - now, it's nowhere near enough for what people want to do on the internet. In another 10 years, we're likely to want, need and expect even faster speeds.

1:15

Comment From Chris Philpott (KC)
Here in Hull KC are comitted to delivering 2mbps to all of our customers both in the City and rurally by the end of this finanical year. Do the panel beleive that 2015 is a realistic target for the rest of the UK?
1:16

Louis Mosley:
I agree with Duncan. It'sa difficult trade-off between superfast speeds for as many as possible and basic 2meg coverage for all. The final 10% - not the Final Third - is where we'll need to be most creative.
1:16
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate why is 2015 hard, Ka Band birds can offer it in 2011 once online, they are in the sky now. 2015 via wires is harder. [via Twitter]
1:16

Comment From D J Taylor
Estimated speeds are often quoted in single numbers eg. "up to 10" without stating whether the unit is kilobit kb or kiloByte kB a huge difference. This vital fact should be mandatory in all advertising.
1:16

Tim O'Sullivan:
Re average speeds, the important thing for consumers is clarity. Our customers want to know what speeds they should expect when ordering broadband. That is why BT tells them what they can expect. we are going further by writing to our customers to confirm this and give them a range of speeds they should expect to always fall between. average speeds would actually provide misinformation rather than clarity as there are too many variables to make them meaningful.
1:16

Sam Crawford:
Well there's there CAP/BCAP consultation on "up to" speeds and "unlimited" advertising due to close later this week. I suspect we'll hear an awful lot more about this subject in the near future. In my opinion it's very encouraging that this subject is generating renewed focus.
1:17
Intobiz:
Lets start the #bbdebate with some honesty from providers about actual speeds that you will experience, if you sign to them [via Twitter]
1:17

Duncan Higgins:
Virgin Media certainly strongly believe that the nature of UK advertising needs to fundamentally change. The days of theoretical maximums and a gaping disparity between headline and actual speeds delivered need to be put behind us. A movement to typical speeds that reflect actual customer experience would be a huge step forward
1:17

Matt Warman:
I was at a broadband conference in North Yorkshire this weekend - communities were getting very angry about very slow speeds. Are those communities in very rural locations basically doomed to very slow services for years to come? Would the panel encourage them to look beyond - or give up hope - on fibre to the premise?
1:18

Ceri Stanaway:
My main concern with 'up to' is that currently this type of advertising refers to speeds nobody can actually get in practice. Literally, nobody - according to Ofcom speed tests. If 'up to' is used, the headline speed should be achievable by at least a reasonable proportion of an ISP's customers, and it should be accompanied by clear information on the type of speeds the majority can realistically expect.
1:18

Comment From hannah stewart
Louis, you reference the potential benefit is greater in rural areas, how is that surmised and do you have any evidence of the potential economic impact? and if so what end uses is that economic data factoring?
1:18

Comment From Phil
Why do people seem to be happy that taxpayers money may be used to rollout fiber across the country? Shouldn't this be left to the market to happen? I believe that some companies will be holding back any rollout of fiber as it will be a waste if the government then decide to subsidise it.
1:18

Comment From Mark Mitchell
Chris Phillpott - you need to make that a stable 2Mbps - you have the most unreliable service in the UK
1:18

Comment From cyberdoyle
Ceri, don't blame you for being confused... your line may or may not support 2meg, but what you get is shared between many others in the exchange. I think the average on a 2 meg line ends up as being around 36k per customer, but I am sure someone on here (phil?) will put up the correct figure. The key is contention. Cheaper ISPs put more people on the feed. Only four customers can watch Iplayer at any one time if they are sharing a 2meg feed, and some ISPs have been known to put up to 400 on a feed. No wonder it doesn't work. To get a 2 meg feed to yourself you would need a leased line.
1:18

Comment From Jon Hunt
We need to move on from speeds to consider the different baskets of applications that can/can't be supported across different connections. The BBC iPlayer always comes up in this context and has become a benchmark, we need more examples. Concurrency (multiple simultaneous applications) needs to be considered too.
1:18
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate On speeds how do you explain that site A is faster because of it being in Docklands, while site B is slow as in maidstone. [via Twitter]
1:18

Comment From Craig Cooper
When it comes to speed does it really vary from provider to provider? is 20mb from Sky the same as 20mb from O2? it all uses the same lines and technology doesn't it?
1:18

Comment From Phil Burrow
Perhaps it would be better if minimum speeds were the only ones permitted, rather than maximum. This way the customer would have a basic service level guarantee, too. So rather than "up to", we have "at least".
1:19

Louis Mosley:
It's in that final 10% that the 'digital village pumps' mentioned by cyberdoyle may have a role to play. Her community at Wray is a great example of what can be done by people who build their own networks.
1:19

Comment From Guest
How do the panel feel about our non-inclusion (again) in the FTTH Council rankings, and the fact that even with BT and VM's roll outs, unless it is FTTH (not FTTC) we will not be included for a VERY long time?
1:19

Comment From Jez Kay
Ceri - yes, it all depends on what the consumers demand. By 2015 it's likely there'll demand streamed HD output as a matter of course, maybe more than x1 per household. Added to the fact that applications will change - 2meg is not going to be enough, particularly if served up via copper (see @cyberdoyle's comment earlier)
1:19

Ceri Stanaway:
Re Matt's question on rural communities, I'd certainly support this - it's something that Which? members in rural areas find incredibly frustrating and unfair. They must pay more for slower services.
1:19

Ian Twinn:
roll out is a real issue as we talk nationally about the level of service. the government aim is welcome, lets hope the providers can sort out the delivery at a speed and reliability that enables us all where ever we are living and tying to work. but in the end this is a competitive issue for business to provide.
1:19
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate To Craig Cooper, same copper lines, but the core networks vary greatly. DSL sync speeds should be similar. [via Twitter]
1:19
silverwaver:
Is there any sound on the #bbdebate or is this just my poor broadband? [via Twitter]
1:19

Tim O'Sullivan:
On rural areas, BT is committed to rolling out our open broadband platform (all service providers can use it) to as many areas as possible. Our £2.5bn investment plan includes both urban and rural locations and we will work with local and central government wherever possible to find solutions for the most challenging areas.
1:20

Matt Warman:
Do readers and the panel think the way people buy broadband will change in the future with, for instance, music services or downloads being included in packages? And what about 'naked DSL' lines?
1:20
MrSaffron:
##BBDebate Can we all be 100% clear panel included the UK has a 28Kbps USO, the 2015 is a 2Meg USC - very different, less obligation [via Twitter]
1:20

Comment From Phil
Can't we have an independant body (Ofcom) being the only ones allowed to measure speed of connection?
1:20
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate on FTTH - well DOCSIS 3 is not FTTH, BT FTTH once numbers are live should appear. As should some metro ethernet from others [via Twitter]
1:21

Matt Warman:
Does the panel also have views on the role of a regulator for broadband? Some countries have official standards for speeds etc. Should we go that way here?
1:21

Comment From Nigel
Regarding contention ratios....As I recall, historically a domestic account was 50-1 and a small business acc , usuall 20-1 ....Why is it I can never seem to find such details today of providers products..am I missing something?
1:21

Comment From cyberdoyle
Phil, fibre won't be rolled out into rural areas. Telcos would far rather keep their customers on the copper phone lines. Throttled and contended.
1:21

Comment From Oli Rhys
The issue of speeds is a red herring - its productivity which is important. I have 33Mb at home (thanks BT) and its not really different than when I had 3Mb - Its just other users in the house don't steal all the bandwidth!
1:21

Matt Warman:
An interesting question from Oli Rhys - is speed actually not the prime issue when it comes to broadband roll-out and availability?
1:22
HmmmUK:
#bbdebate - I'm not 100% convinced the Telegraph has the best format for this broadband 'debate'. More of a tweet/comment fest! :¬) [via Twitter]
1:22

Sam Crawford:
Matt - I think a lot of providers will be very keen to bundle music, movies, etc with their service, as they don't wish to be viewed as purely a pipe. Whether or not the public wish to adopt this is another question!
1:22

Tim O'Sullivan:
on 'bundled packages' , we know consumers like the option of choosing bundles such as their standard telephone service, broadband and TV services in a single package. as services and technology evolve (such as YouView) I'm sure this trend will continue
1:22

Duncan Higgins:
We continue to invest in rolling out our cable network - we have added nearly 300k homes in the last two years through our own commercial investment. As part of this, we continue to explore innovative ways of bringing super fast broadband to as many homes as possible. For example, we have successfully trialled the use of telegraph poles in a Berskhire village and are working with utility companies to make use of existing infrastructure in Wales.
1:22

Comment From Mark Edwards
Re: Matt and Ceri...my dad lives 3 miles from a major town and still only gets "at best" 0.1 meg download. We need cable!!!!!
1:23

Comment From Peter
Tim - when will you announce these areas?
1:23

Louis Mosley:
Re. Matt's question. Communities in very rural locations are not doomed. I'm certain that in the not-too-distant future, apps will be such that every home will need lots of bandwidth. FTTP should be the goal wherever possible, but it's fair to say that given the very low population density of many rural areas, next generation mobile broadband might do the trick.
1:23

Comment From Oli Rhys
The broadband charge in the future will be like electric bills - the speed being set and you pay for how much bandwidth you use!
1:23
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate Nigel, contention wholesale market changed in 2004 and is almost impossible to calculate, some ISP's it can be 100:1 now [via Twitter]
1:23

Ceri Stanaway:
That's a really interesting question about the way we buy broadband Matt. A few year's back, every type of telecoms service had to be bought standalone - with a few exceptions. Now, bundling broadband in with phone, TV or mobile is the norm rather than the exception. Obviously I can't speak for ISPs, but I wouldn't be surprised if they look for new and innovative ways to sell there products. We may also see different charges for access to different types of service (for example paying more to be ABLE to download films, less if you only want to email and shop). Interested to get peoples' views on this.
1:23

Matt Warman:
Another interesting question from a reader - will broadband networks soon be seen as simply another utility, like water, and what does that mean for the ISPs?
1:24

Comment From dom clery
what a load of flatulent guff. A couple of years ago I spent weeks re-programming endless crappy tests on some garbage site (Just incredibly poor mis-functioning, the 'official' test site set up by BT I think - as our service providers agreed it was completely hit and miss even to logo onto). Eventually after weeks of endless crap I was told that despite the service we were paying for being 4-5 megs, BT wouldn't even investigate - WOULDN'T EVEN INVESTIGATE
1:24

Ian Twinn:
'up to' is a real problem. However advertising, even if it were only regional campaigns has to address consumers in such a wide variety of circumstances that it is difficult to get a competitive message out there. The ASA rules are clear, advertising must not mislead and advertisers need the proof for their claims.
1:24

Comment From Mark Steele
@Tim O'Sullivan - Is there a published list of roll out dates for upgrades to rural exchanges?
1:24

Comment From cyberdoyle
Tim, your solution is to put cabinets in. That means that the real rurals, the notspots will still not get a connection. The funding is for notspots, not patching up your copper network. Cabinets will increase the digital divide even further, as their reach isn't very far. Also cabinets will not give a futureproof connection, they are just a stopgap, and will need further funding in the future to upgrade. They will act as a donut round an exchange, leaving many people on the old speeds.
1:24

Comment From John/Salford
Why are the people in the cities etc being punished by being forced to subsidise the rural areas. I can't think of anything the rural area's have subsidised for everyone else ?
1:25

Ceri Stanaway:
I reckon many people already see broadband as utility - the very fact that we're talking about a universal service commitment suggests this. If it wasn't something the government regarded as essential - just like electricity - we wouldn't even be having this debate.
1:25

Louis Mosley:
Re. Oli Rhys. Speed shouldn't be the prime issue. We should think about a much broader definiton of what 'superfast broadband' means. Especially as we begin to run critical applications over networks.
1:25

Duncan Higgins:
I think we are increasingly seeing a change in how Broadband is purchased both in terms of in Broadband bundles, e.g. music, security, etc but also across the "quad play" of TV, phone, mobile and Broadband. This however does not take away from the fact that the basic quality of the broadband will remain a key purchasing decision for the foreseeable future.
1:25

Tim O'Sullivan:
I think speed is sometime too much of a focus without the question of what services do people need and want to use and what bandwidth do they therefore require. a 40mg service should provide plenty of capacity for most households now. PArt of the question in investment in higher speeds is how we prepare ourselves for the future and allow new innovative services to develop.
1:25

Matt Warman:
An interesting question from Jon in Salford, too: is it right that urban users subsidise the rural users? Or should rural users simply pay more for a service that was more expensive to install?
1:25
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate this is NOT a rural/urban battle, plenty of urban estates with issues too [via Twitter]
1:25

Comment From Peter
Any comment on comment that 'telcos want to keep copper'. Let's get this sorted once and for all.
1:26

Comment From M Grant
To Virgin - Why when you say averages deliver a better customer experience do some of the references to your packages promote 'up to' speeds, surely you are going against your publicised principles of preferring averages?
1:26

Comment From Nigel
"Nigel, contention wholesale market changed in 2004 and is almost impossible to calculate, some ISP's it can be 100:1 now
1:26

Sam Crawford:
Louis - Agreed. The term "superfast" is a personal bugbear of mine; it's used as if it has a proper definition and seems to have a different meaning everywhere you look.
1:26
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate in rural areas via BT Wholesale an ISP pays more than in Market 3 exchanges, look at Plusnet pricing for the picture [via Twitter]
1:26

Comment From ron
It would do this country a great deal of economic good if the government had the foresight to fund the provision of high speed fibre optic connections to the great majority of the population. Countries like S Korea do this! But it does not seem to be politically acceptable for a British government to do so. A pity.
1:26

Comment From M.Vickers
To Tim O'Sullivan: why is it that BT sells a product eg broadband upto 20Mb knowing that the customer won't get that. I currently pay for "up to 8 MBit" broadband" and sometimes get less than 500 Kbit. Why can't we pay for what we get rather than being mis-sold these products??
1:26

Ceri Stanaway:
I actually agree with Tim and a few other readers on not getting too hung up on speed, purely because it's only one aspect that people need to consider when choosing a broadband service. Reliability of connection, price and customer service are all also vital. No good to have superfast broadband if your connection drops every five minutes, or if you can't get decent help at the end of a phone if you have a problem.
1:27

Comment From Jim Haynes
Broadband is not 'essential' for anyone.
1:27

Matt Warman:
Jim Haynes questions whether broadband will be 'essential' - does the panel think it will be healthcare and other advanced uses that in fact drive roll-out?
1:27

Louis Mosley:
Re. John/Salford. You're not being punished by being forced to subsidese in rural areas! You're being forced to INVEST in rural areas. A broadband network is an investment. Functioning superfast broadband in the UK's rural areas will lead to a diversifation of the rural enconomy away from agriculture and tourism. It will lead to huge growth in rural SMEs, home-working etc. All this will provide the Treasury (and you) with a great return.
1:27

Comment From cyberdoyle
http://gigaom.com/broadband/we-will-soon-live-in-a-100-gbps-world/ the world will soon be gigabit, and we will still be on 2meg coppercrap if we aren't careful.
1:28

Duncan Higgins:
Matt, with regard to the question of whether speed is the key issue then faster broadband is better broadband. The nature of a typical consumer's usage is changing dramatically. We have seen a 200%+ growth in the last three years over our network driven by greater multiple use, greater rich media and streaming applications and we certainly see this continuing moving forward.
1:28

Comment From Peter
We are a small rural architectural practice that employs 10 people. We try to send and receive as much graphic material as we can via the internet for economic, environmental and financial reasons. We are seriously inhibited through an average daytime download speed of 3.19 and an average upload speed of 0.72. these speeds fall dramatically when schoolchildren return to their homes.
1:28

Comment From Nigel
MrSaffron. I assume calculated or not, it still remains, the higher the users within the contention, the slower the individual connection?
1:28

Comment From cyberdoyle
John in Salford, getting fibre to the rurals will mean market forces will do the urban areas. It will drive investment. Otherwise you will end up on copper for infinity.
1:28

Comment From Phil Burrow
The problem with providing guarantees for applications instead of speed is the activity at the customer site. If the customer has a family all using the connection, can they all stream iPlayer, or just one of them? Can they all view Youtube at once in HD, or just one of them? What's the guarantee?
1:28

Tim O'Sullivan:
concerning MR Vickers point re speeds, BT does tell each customer at the point of sale what speed he or she should expect. The 'up to speeds' provide an indication of the fastest possible speed but yo are right that customers need more clarity than that. That is why we inform customers of what they will actually get. we believe this should be common practice.
1:29
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate to those who work and see speeds fall off when schools shuts, change providers. Go to one that does not attract joe/jill average [via Twitter]
1:29

Sam Crawford:
Thoroughly in agreement with Ceri - speed is not always king. High latency or packet loss will have a very significant impact on your overall broadband performance. A recent study in the US showed that beyond around 8Mbps, web page loading times varied by only a tiny amount - the key driver beyond this was latency. And it's with fibre based services that we really see the latency (and stability of the connection) improve.
1:29

Matt Warman:
And could the panel give us a sense of how important they think users' home's internal wiring can be to improving?
1:29

Comment From MarkA
Speed maywell be a consideration, but Qualit of service should be just important, i.e. response of ALL services, and not just browsing in BT's (an others) case.
1:29
cyberdoyle:
http://tinyurl.com/4ahkqvo #bbdebate #digitalbritianmyarse korea storms ahead with gigabit. we stay on copper for infinity. [via Twitter]
1:29

Comment From Nigel
"Broadband is not 'essential' for anyone" Personally, for me, that is a fallcy6 and entirely incorrect..television maybe...BB, no
1:29

Comment From HmmmUK
Re. "broadband is essential" - it is for me as it lets me work!
1:29

Comment From Ian Bland
How many people are prepared to pay for a lower contention ration? I pay a "premium" price with my ISP but am unthrottled. Are people demanding a state subsidy?
1:30

Louis Mosley:
Re. John/Salford. See the comment from Peter above. He's a good example of the sort of business that could grow in rural areas. By spending money on rural broadband networks we are investing in him, not subsidising him.
1:30
MrSaffron:
##BBDebate pure PAYG bb has been tried, i.e. per MB you download, and has not taken off, since it can result in big bills Tiered usage works [via Twitter]
1:30
yarwell:
@IntoBiz provider websites give specific speed estimates ? #bbdebate [via Twitter]
1:30

Matt Warman:
And does the panel envisage companies being much more explicit about contention rations and what user's are actually paying for? Will that move advertising beyond mere speed figures?
1:30
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate, it is not just internal wiring, ability of the supplied hardware to provide fast wireless too [via Twitter]
1:30

Comment From John/Salford
Louis, perhaps those people who choose to love in rural areas should invest in our areas.......you know just for a change!
1:31

Comment From Phil
There is simply not enough capacity in our ancient BT exchanges to give 'superfast' speeds to all users. This is regardless of FTTx as BT still need a way of delivering the fiber at the point of entry to the exchange to the ISPs own equipment.
1:31

Ceri Stanaway:
I think broadband uptake is all about how people want to use broadband and what services are available, rather than being around numbers. What people want is a reliable sufficiently speedy service to be able to do what they want online - whether that's watching TV, sending an email, or accessing healthcare. As I mentioned earlier, if the government increasingly moves towards pushing services online - such as healthcare, tax, advice etc - broadband is going to become more and more 'essential'. I also think, though, that it's important for the government not to alienate people by pushing services solely online. The truth is that some people will never want broadband.
1:31
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate unless providers are forced to publish the committed bit rate i.e. ~40Kbps then they will avoid it, as people will not understand [via Twitter]
1:31

Matt Warman:
On a basic point, following on from contention ratios and speed, could the panel or the readers offer some definitions of either Next Generation Access or Superfast?
1:32

Comment From Oli Rhys
One point which keeps being kept quiet is the effect that the LTE wireless auction will have on the UK in the next 5 years. 100 Mb by air is going to be possible - making the whole fibre & copper debate redundant! - anyone which to comment?
1:32

Tim O'Sullivan:
concerning the issue of internal wiring - it is true that this and other factors (e.g interference) can impinge upon the speeds people get in their homes. This is another reason why 'average speeds' in advertising would be a nonsense. Bt 's new hub works to eliminate interference. we also have a product called Broadband Accelerator' which helps eliminate interference on lines and improves the line speed.
1:32
Intobiz:
@yarwell #bbdebate Yes but curious to know how accurate those estimates turn out to be and who provide the fastest and most reliable service [via Twitter]
1:32

Sam Crawford:
Agreed with MrSaffron: Beyond around 30-40Mbps, we see issues with equipment in the home - not just wiring. Wireless may be a limiting factor, as may an old router with a slower processor, or a PC with poor TCP/IP settings.
1:32

Comment From Ian Bland
Who is this "we" who are "investing" and do "we" get a financail return on our "investment"?
1:32
HmmmUK:
#bbdebate Re. Home wiring - this is incredibly important and often over looked. BT's IP Profile system and Fault resolution are also issues! [via Twitter]
1:32

Comment From Peter
Louis Moseley, we should be content to pay for an enhanced broadband service, we are not asking to be subsidised.
1:32

Comment From Nigel
I am fully prepared to pay for a superior unthrottled connection with low contention. Using ZEN I'm sure I already do . (Superb provider BTW)
1:32

Comment From Peter
Phil - ancient exchanges - please clarify in detail for all.
1:33
cyberdoyle:
RT @MrSaffron: #BBDebate unless providers are forced to publish the committed bit rate i.e. ~40Kbps then they will avoid it, as people w ... [via Twitter]
1:33

Duncan Higgins:
Hi M Grant, we are certainly keen to see a change in the way that Broadband speeds are advertised. We have taken a unilateral step in publishing our typical speeds alongside our "up to" advertising and look forward to the other ISPs following suit in the near future. We are already at a disadvantage when our "up to 10Mb" service outperforms all but one of our competitors' "up to 24Mb" services and need this to be changed across the industry. We also strongly believe that unless this change occurs across the industry the incentive for companies to invest won't be there
1:33

Comment From ron
Yes, I think there should definitely be a state subsidy to provide decent broadband, unfortunately state subsidy is a dirty word these days. Yet we will be left behind economically by countries that do not share this negative view state support.
1:33

Louis Mosley:
Hi Peter, interesting question. Perhaps Tim and Duncan might want to answer it. Would BT or Virgin consider different prices for rural areas?
1:34
cyberdoyle:
RT @MrSaffron: #BBDebate this is NOT a rural/urban battle, plenty of urban estates with issues too #digitalbritian [via Twitter]
1:34

Comment From Phil Burrow
I agree with Ceri, all people want is a connection that allows them to view the sites they want and watch the content they want when they want it. But speed is the only way anyone can "compare" broadband packages at this moment in time. The companies know this, which is why they all advertise "up to" speeds, to hoodwink consumers into thinking their product provides more bandwidth.
1:34

Comment From Ian Bland
"Superfast" definition: Faster than I have at the moment and I heard some other country has and I want somebody else to pay for the investment upgrade.
1:34
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate To VM typical speeds of which users? Those using a lot of data or those using average or those using a little? [via Twitter]
1:34

Comment From Jonboy
Reply to Cyberdoyle "korea storms ahead with gigabit. we stay on copper for infinity." [via Twitter] - Korea sunk 20billion of public money and 70 per cent of them live in mult-tennant buildings - whats yer point Cyberdoyle?
1:34

Ceri Stanaway:
Don't many providers already offer different prices for rural areas? (And not in a good way)
1:34

Matt Warman:
And on that note - is it right that the media and reports routinely compare the UK to, eg, Korea? Can we ever hope to compete?
1:35

Tim O'Sullivan:
on definition of superfast, BT uses the term when we talk about our fibre services. depending on the technology deployed, these services provide speeds of up to 40 or 100mg (with the potential to go higher still). Our copper line services also offer speeds of 'up to' 20mg (which some other service providers market as superfast).
1:35

Ian Twinn:
speaking personally I do not see where the 'State subsidy' is going to come from. Paying is going to have to be me as a consumer paying not me as a tax payer
1:35

Comment From M.Vickers
To Tim O'Sullivan: Thank you for clarifying the point that you now actually tell customers what speeds they can get, but still sell them the "fictional" speed; it is fictional after all - there is no way you can get the advertised speed that you pay for unless of course you live in your local exchange - or am I way off the mark?
1:35

Ceri Stanaway:
I think necessary in the definition of superfast is consistency of speed, rather than headline speed.
1:35

Comment From pete
back to rural Shropshire ...why is it incumbent on rural communities to 'build their own networks' when urban dwellers get it on a plate for nothing? Sorry , Louis , but your attitude is a bit of a copout.
1:35

Comment From Gary
The whole business model is broken.
1:36

Comment From Gary
I've got Virgin as the copper to the hous eis very slow, but what use is a 10Mbit connection with a cripplingly low data cap? It's liek saying your new car does 100miles to the gallon (*but only between 1pm and 3pm and 10 MPG at all other times)
1:36

Comment From Ian Thompson
'Essential' ....... what, as in food, clothing, income, shelter? Get real.
1:36

Comment From wayne
How are you going improve the quality of broadband, ie latency times, and keep it from not losing a connections
1:36

Comment From Tim Higgs
Ceri - yes broadband in rural areas is already more expensive at market 1 exchanges and usually limited to up-to 8Mbps.
1:36

Comment From Colin
We are so slow in North Shropshire I even keep losing today's discussion. I run a small business but bbroadband is unreliable and slow. Maximum speed is 1mbs. Parts of the village have 512 kbs and some none. HELP!!!!
1:36
yarwell:
@IntoBiz #bbdebate see OFCOM published work on bbcop compliance. Line estimates generally good. [via Twitter]
1:36

Comment From John/Salford
Louis, a great lady once said "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. " and yet you are promoting subsidising people constantly with things like broadband
1:36

Comment From Mark Steele
Some rural exchanges are so small they can only house BT exchange (which to be fair is what they were originally designed for)
1:36

Comment From Mark Edwards
Re Matt Warman: How can we compete? Its like wearing a suit with no trousers. As Gary says the whole uk business model is broken
1:36
HmmmUK:
#bbdebate Can any of the panel say while an IP Profile DROPS immediately but can take up to 5 days to INCREASE? Lots of users are effected. [via Twitter]
1:36

Comment From pete
no use quoting platitudes relating to rollouts, Mr.O'Sullivan . It appears that all you are committed to is rolloout to 'as many areas as possible' . That sounds like a nice get-out clause for you.
1:37

Comment From Stevie
What role do you see content having? Will you be moving to offer more content services? What about illegal content clogging your pipes? It seems it would have an impact on service and speeds...
1:37

Ceri Stanaway:
Re Matt's question around comparison with Korea, I confess I do get a bit frustrated with media obsession with this. The UK needs what the UK needs - whether that's 2Mbps, 10Mbps or 100Mbps.
1:37

Comment From Nigel
Anybody any views on satellite BB? Seems expensive at the moment, anybody see any potential of change on that front?
1:37

Sam Crawford:
HmmmUK - This is dependent on your provider. Each LLU operator will run their own profile management system, and they all work in different ways.
1:37
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate To colin, when people talk of 0.5 and 1Meg only invariably means on old product, not r-adaptive, so lots to be done just need help [via Twitter]
1:37

Matt Warman:
And what about satellite broadband? Do the panel think it's essential or a stopgap?
1:38

Comment From Phil Burrow
You're always going to run into a problem when the broadband providers themselves provide the figures. Perhaps Ofcom should survey them and provide a league table of realistic speeds.
1:38
yarwell:
@HmmmUK that's how it's designed. #bbdebate [via Twitter]
1:38

Comment From Ian Bland
People in cities get it "on a plate" because we are densely packed into expensive property. Are rural dwellers willing to put up with all that for cheaper broadband, or do they want their cake and eat it?
1:38

Louis Mosley:
Moving on from the question of ROI in rural areas, there's also a social question. In 5 years time, will residents of rural areas be able to say 'I can play a ful part in the social and democratic life of the country' without being online?
1:38

Comment From Phil
When copper phone lines were first introduced, the customer had to pay for the line to be installed. Why has this changed and now people expect fiber optics to just lay themselves straight to their property? If you want it, pay for it. There are still remote homes in this country that can't get an 'essential' phone line (without BB).
1:38
HmmmUK:
#bbdebate Sam,most people still can't get LLU and have to use BTs platform. These will often be the ppl with the poorest lines to start with [via Twitter]
1:38

Comment From John/Salford
A Wireless BB system would be best for rural areas. One they pay for themselves like everyone else
1:38

Comment From cyberdoyle
Jonboy, my point is that if we don't invest then the digital economy of this country will decline, and we will be left behind. A thirdworld slow lane. We have lost our manufacturing industries, digital could pull us back to being a world leader, but we need fibre to everyone to do it. next generation access for the next generation.
1:39

Comment From Geoff
More often than not, Korea isdelivering 1000Mbps to apartment buildings that then share it amongst hundreds of users. Media picks up on the 1000Mpbs bit but ignores the rest!
1:39

Ceri Stanaway:
To Nigel - yes you're right, satellite broadband is hugely expensive. Which? only recommends it as a last resort if you simply can't get anything else. That said, if fixed line and mobile broadband can't plug the gaps in broadband availability, perhaps we'll see improvements and cheaper prices. I've just spotted a comment from John/Salford though - yes, local wireless systems for local communities are a good way to address gaps.
1:39
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate must disagree on most not getting LLU, TalkTalk around 85% of homes others at the 60% mark. [via Twitter]
1:39

Comment From Tim Higgs
Satellite is going to be important in providing a basic service to very rural places that are impossible to serve any other way. But as a means for average Joe living in a normal village wanting to stream and download it will be usless!
1:39

Tim O'Sullivan:
M. Vickers - the 'up to advertising' indicates the highest speed possible that customers could get using the technology advertised. Thats what the use of 'up to' tries to convey. However, you're right that people should know what they are buying. Thats why telling the customers the actual position on their line is important and means they are full knowledge before signing on the dotted line. Do let me know if you have a particular concern about the service you received personally.....
1:39
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate Local wireless is only as good as the link to the wider network, no good have GigE fibre and a 10Meg bottleneck in the chain [via Twitter]
1:40

Louis Mosley:
Hi John/Salford, I'm no socialist, promise! I've always agreed with Ronald Reagan: "Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don't need it, and hell where they already have It."
1:40
HmmmUK:
@yarwell #bbdebate So it needs improving. No copper or fibre involved and 1000's of people with less stable lines would see improvements! [via Twitter]
1:40

Matt Warman:
Catching up with an earlier question, too: gigabit trials are going but, are we risking developing (and exacerbating) a haves and a have nots culture when we should be focusing on sorting out rural issues?
1:40

Comment From Geoff
Rural debate: I pay 5 times the price for my property in central london, and get better broadband. Why should rural people with lower living costs also benefit from a subsidy for their broadband?
1:41

Tim O'Sullivan:
BT operates universal national pricing for our broadband services. Wherever you live, you pay the same price. Its fair and transparent.
1:41

Comment From Alistair
Which companies are responsible for the backbone and who is responsible for the last mile?
1:41

Comment From Ian Thompson
Ralph - 'about time Crowborough delivered the same broadband as I got in Buenos Aires'? Have you looked a map recently?
1:41

Comment From Tim Higgs
Download limits on Satellite broadband are currently very restrictive! Just 12GB for £99 per month.
1:41

Comment From Nigel
Thanks Ceri, interesting observation. We shall see what transpires.
1:42

Comment From Jonboy
To Cyberdoyle Isn't this just sloganising? Who is gonna pay for it? The Korean Gov chose to.
1:42

Sam Crawford:
Matt - For the remotest of areas I think satellite will always provide an option of last resort, or a backup service if connectivity is absolutely critical. Also, satellite providers have similar contention issues (if not far worse) than fixed-line operators. There would have to be a fundamental infrastructure change to support a huge new influx of subscribers.
1:42

Comment From ron
cyberdoyle is right I think, if this country does not invest in decent broadband (or roads, railways etc.) then this country will further decline.
1:42
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate BT Retail operates universal pricing for broadband. BT Wholesale most certainly DOES NOT. Also BT Retail own Plusnet [via Twitter]
1:42

Ceri Stanaway:
Are the two mutually exclusive? Can we not achieve the two in tandem? I'm sure between the brilliant technology that ISPs possess, and the role the government has to play in ensuring a basic broadband service, it should be possible to achieve both (she says, hopefully). I certainly don't think basic access should be demoted in favour of megafast broadband (the step beyond superfast).
1:42

Louis Mosley:
On the question of satellite, I agree with Sam. It will have an important part to play, but only for the most remote properties and as a backup service.
1:43

Duncan Higgins:
Putting a number on superfast is difficult but basically customers having enough reliable bandwidth to fuel multiple usage and data heavy applications such as streaming video. What it isn't is "up to 24Mb" broadband passing itself off as "Superfast" broadband. Given the speeds that these services they actually deliver this merely undermines the concept of superfast being the future of Broadband in the UK
1:43

Matt Warman:
Does the panel, also, regard the final third issue as a problem for government or for ISPs and operators?
1:43
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate Look at new Ka-Band birds a LOT more capacity than existing. Again pay peanuts for service get pigeon feed [via Twitter]
1:43

Comment From Phil Burrow
Could the 3G network not be used to provide access to remote areas? Or is this too slow?
1:43

Sam Crawford:
Matt - We mustn't stand still, and it's absolutely right that gigabit trials are proceeding. I agree with Ceri that the two needn't be mutually exclusive though.
1:43

Comment From Ian Bland
@Matt Warman in any free society there will be "haves" and "have nots" or "have mores" and "have lesses". Some people "have not" got a girlfriend. Should the state provide one?
1:43

Comment From Jeff
Matt, to be honest, 4-5 Mb in a rural area would be liveable if the cost was as fair as the 20Mb plus in the cities - we pay more for less, much less!
1:43

Comment From Mark Edwards
crowborough? I can assure you that My dad, who lives near there, is getting 512 k. Fact
1:43

Comment From John/Salford
Televisions are coming with IPTV and boxes too soon so is there a real future while companies are capping people ?
1:43

Comment From Ian Thompson
cyberdoyle and now ron - "if we don't invest we will be left behind" - who is the "we" please? Govt as in Korea?
1:43

Comment From GM
Railway Hill in Barham, Kent with a download speed of 0.13Mb. The customers on that road pay exactly the same as people elsewhere with the same broadband deal. Explain how that is right? Surely instead of fitting fibre optic in Ashford, just down the road, perhaps money should be spent bringing rural areas up to scratch?
1:44
yarwell:
#bbdebate lots of minutiae about current BB where's the vision? Plan for 2020? [via Twitter]
1:44

Comment From cyberdoyle
Tim, BT doesn't give the same service in rural and urban areas, that is a marketing spin, aka as a porkie.
1:44

Comment From Tom Smith
I am curious about BT Infinity. Can everyone in a BT Infinity enabled area get BT Infinity? I read that BT are leaving blackspots and some people in areas being advertised as BT Infinity are being told they can’t get it.
1:44

Comment From John/Salford
Phil, 4G could but we don't have it yet
1:44

Duncan Higgins:
@Tim, nice principle but people are clearly frustrated at they what they are getting particularly as a DSL customer getting 12Mb will be paying the same as someone on 1.2Mb
1:44
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate Rainham hill, it is not clear what the issue is, without visiting homes and look at stats from lines it is not conclusive [via Twitter]
1:45

Tim O'Sullivan:
Pete - I don't want to sound patronising and quote platitudes. I'm just telling it as it is. BT is committed to rolling out to all areas. There are economic hurdles to doing this and hat is something the Government has recognised in bringing forward public funding to help augment the commercial deployment by private investors. BT's track record shows it is committed to both urban and rural areas and we will continue to be so.
1:45

Matt Warman:
Some questions, too, about symmetry: at the moment upload is miles away from download for most people. Doing enough to address what will surely be an increasingly important issue?
1:45

Comment From cyberdoyle
Tim, if I want a 30 meg connection for my business I have to pay my ISP £76,000.00 per year, plus 'fixed costs' which could run up to a million pounds at openreach prices. Just because I live and work in a rural area. Many homes and businesses near me can't get any broadband at all, or mobile either. Satellites won't work because of south facing hills. Stop the bt hype and tell the truth.
1:45
MrSaffron:
@yarwell #BBDebate the plan is to be the best, whatever that means, we have a civil servant operated metric [via Twitter]
1:45

Comment From Aled Morris
@GM: Barham in Kent has the option of faster internet via wireless (OrbitNet/Vfast) which gives >10Mbps
1:46

Ceri Stanaway:
I think the final third is an issue for both government AND ISPs. Someone also mentioned mobile broadband and whether this is too slow to fill gaps. Interestingly, mobile broadband operators rarely advertise their speeds - perhaps because they are so slow and variable (in Which? satisfaction surveys, mobile broadband always fares poorly compared to fixed line). So yes, at present mobile broadband probably is too slow to be very helpful. But technology is improving all the time, and we have digital switchover completing next year which will free up spectrum. It's possible some of that will be used to improve mobile broadband services and speeds - which may then help with the larger problem.
1:46

Sam Crawford:
Matt - Yes, upstream speeds will become increasingly important, particularly with people uploading photos, videos and other media far more frequently nowadays. In the US we see Verizon's FiOS service available to consumers with 50Mbps symmetric, and we're some way off that here. However, Virgin bumped up their upload speeds in December and BT's Infinity service has a much faster 10Mbps upstream, so we're definitely making progress.
1:47

Matt Warman:
Does the panel think fttc will be a thing of the past in a matter of time, and how long will that time be?
1:47
yarwell:
@HmmmUK #bbdebate cost issue and kit limits on changes per hour. Little benefit for most. [via Twitter]
1:47

Tim O'Sullivan:
Cyberdoyle - I was talking about price. Thats the same everywhere. Its true, even within urban areas, the nature of copper technology means that different households get different speeds.
1:48

Matt Warman:
[that's fibre to the cabinet, by the way]
1:48

Comment From Geoff
Unless anyone can prove a direct economic benefit, rational private sector businesses will not invest. Thus far speculation, hot air, and High Def TV are the only demands on bandwidth > 10Mbps. If there is no obvious bankable economic benefit, then declare it a social good andlet the government pay for it. debate over.
1:48

Comment From Tim Higgs
Phil - 3G can be used but there is limited capacity! You are looking at sharing 7.2Mbps with all other users (phones, ipads, mobile broadband) that are connected to the same sector as you.
1:48

Comment From M.Vickers
Thank you Mr Sullivan, I do get annoyed when I am paying for something I am not getting. I pay for "upto 8 Mbits" and have measured horribly low speeds at peak time (eg 1900). I have had BT call me recently asking if I wanted to upgrade to the " upto 20Mbit service" but declined due to previously state gripes. I would love it if someone would contact me to rectify / explain my slow speed. How can I give you my contact details without broadcasting them over this public space.
1:48

Comment From John/Salford
Wireless broadband has been proven a success in some rural areas one of which was paid for by the residents so why is this being ignored now?
1:48

Comment From Paul
It's a shame the usual suspects can't be as honest and open as Cyberdoyle, but not in least bit surprising...
1:48

Louis Mosley:
I agree with Ceri. The only thing I would add is that it will be important to ensure that the licenses sold as part of the spectrum auction next year have sufficiently robust coverage obligations. The government got that wrong last time round.
1:48
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate FTTC is a 10-15 year product, FTTP will supercede when copper values increase enough. [via Twitter]
1:48

Duncan Higgins:
Matt, the final third is an issue for the Government, the regulator and ISPs. We need to make the most of all existing infrastructure in these areas where there is no other choice and so moves to allow us to pay BT a fair commercial rate for existing pole and duct infrastructure is welcomed.
1:49
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate Even in 2015 under current law the only coverage obligation for broadband is 28Kbps functional internet over a dial up connection [via Twitter]
1:50

Comment From Tim Higgs
Vfast is now offering 15Mbps for Vhome and 24Mbps for Vmax in Barham and other rural Kent areas.
1:50

Tim O'Sullivan:
Tom - not everyone in an exchange area that has been enabled for fibre services (BT's product is Infinity but all providers could sell services where our network is deployed) will be abel to get it. On average well over 70% of cabinets are enabled within an exchange area where investment has been made -covering about 85% of premises.
1:50

Matt Warman:
A counter-intuitive question, too: with all this push for 100mbps, or similar, are a number of consumers going to receive - and pay - for far more than they actually need?
1:50

Comment From HmmmUK
Have people looked at the cost for 3G bandwidth etc. it's not what I would call a usable solution - just good for an emergency backup!
1:51

Comment From Alistair
What would be the cost to lay fibre to every house that is on the power grid in the UK? Is it possible to use the existing power grid itself for really remote properties?
1:51
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate on FTTC another issue is rejected orders for lines estimated at under 15Meg, not all providers accept these orders yet [via Twitter]
1:51

Comment From Ian Thompson
please, please, please - we know some rural areas don't get the same speed as some urban area, but let's have some honesty here - who is supposed to pay for it? Or should we just accept that you dpon't get the same things in rural areas as elsewhere (no motorway at your doorstep, no hypermarket to do your shppring, no ready choice of museums, cultural attractions etc for the kids in the holidays, etc) - it's called making a choice of lifestyle isn't it?
1:51

Comment From Geoff
cyberdoyle - why don't you just move premises?
1:51

Duncan Higgins:
Matt, on the issue of upstream then Virgin is currently making significant investment in our upstream speeds. Over 50% of our customers have now received a free upgrade to their existing speeds increasing them from anywhere between 100-250%! This roll out will be complete by early 2012 and our customers are certainly already enjoying the benefits of this investment.
1:51

Comment From Mark Steele
Councils and the government are putting many of there services online so a reliable connection for all is required
1:51

Ceri Stanaway:
Re upload speeds, I think it's fair to say that for most home broadband users, upload isn't as important as download speeds. There are a few exceptions - for example if you upload a lot of photos, or send emails with big attachments. But for home users, bar these examples, almost all activity is currently downloading. For business users or those who work from home, obviously it's a very different matter, but I believe many business plans address this. That said, upload speeds could become increasingly important if the government pushes services online, for example for holding video consultations between a doctor and a patient.
1:51

Comment From Phil Burrow
Thanks for the replies on 3G. Seems to me that investing in next gen technology (be it 4G for remote areas or fibre in urban areas) is more forward-thinking than wasting money on 2MBit "super fast" broadband that most consumers already deem slow and by the time it's rolled out, old technology.
1:51

Comment From cyberdoyle
Tim, you can spin as much as you like, but rural areas are paying the same as urban areas but don't get a fit for purpose connection. Public money is better spent helping new networks do the job you don't want to do. Getting a connection to the final third. If you don't intend to use the existing ducts and poles in rural areas I think you should hand them over to others. Who will JFDI.
1:52
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate FTTH for all was costed at £29 billion. BPL mains does not have the range and would create a whole other set of issues. [via Twitter]
1:52

Comment From Aled Morris
In time we will be running fibre everywhere we have electricty or phone lines today - however remote you are - the question is, do we want to waste money on interim solutions like BET, Satellite, VDSL etc. This is more acute when talking about public money - if BT want to spend their own money on FTTC then fine, but I ask our public servants not to fund these temporary solutions
1:52

Comment From John/Salford
Duncan, investing in upstream is great but you are still capping your customers so once they watch a few hours of iplayer its capped to a trickle. Thats no good for a family
1:52

Comment From Ian Bland
@cyberdoyle, rural areas are more costly to serve. Bear that in mind please.
1:52

Louis Mosley:
Hi Alistair, it's perfectly possible. Fibre could be strung along existing power lines. Hopefully, power companies will start to issue prices for pole sharing as BT has done.
1:52

Comment From Phil
O2 reject any customers who's connection speed is predicted to be below a certain speed. All so they can continue advertising their high average speed.
1:53
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate the issue is can the nation afford the best solution, or do we gamble on spending what we can now and upgrade when richer. [via Twitter]
1:53

Comment From Phil Burrow
Totally agree with John/Salford in relation to Virgin's capping.
1:53

Tim O'Sullivan:
Cyberdoyle - we're determined to find a solution for areas such as yours. we're working hard to do so. Any other operator could equally invest to solve your problem but I would doubt any will step forward to do so.
1:53

Comment From Alistair
thanks Louis - now I know what pole sharing is :-)
1:54

Comment From Geoff
cyberdoyle - the cost of delivering broadband to the most remote 5% of the UK is probably about equal to the cost of delivering it to the first 95%
1:54

Comment From John/Salford
Did no one see BBC click a few months ago where a rural village paid for its own broadband connection. They now get 50mb speeds for just £50 pound a week and yes no subsidise from us
1:54

Duncan Higgins:
Matt, again, 100Mb is about delivering the speeds that people will need today and tomorrow. The nature of a consumer's usage is changing and the industry needs to evolve to meet that demand. Multiple users in the home, the nature of applications they are using, the number of connected devices is all rising rapidly. Would the readers not agree that the way they are wanting to use their Broadband connection is evolving?
1:54

Comment From Colin
http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange_search
1:54

Comment From Colin
Check your excahange info here http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange_search
1:54

Comment From Mark Steele
@Tim - Could BT set up a site so people could see what is planned for their exchange?
1:54

Comment From cyberdoyle
john/salford we use wireless, but we can't get an affordable backhaul to expand our service or even to benefit from the many services now appearing. That is the whole argument for digital village pumps. Get the fibre out to the rural areas which will give an affordable pipe to buy whatever feed they need. The rural communities can then invest in fibre digs or wifi networks to utilise this feed. They can JFDI or help themselves. The public money should go into the main infrastructure. Communities can then be enabled to help themselves. More bang for government buck.
1:54
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate believe that was Hambledon, and look at costs for exceeding the 25GB monthly allowance and install costs. Rich people only needed [via Twitter]
1:55

Ceri Stanaway:
Matt, re your question on whether people will end up paying for 100Mbps they don't need. I think that ISPs should continue to provide a range of services to suit all types of user, alongside clear and honest information on what type of user each package would suit. But also agree with Duncan to a certain extent, a few years in the future 2Mbps or even 8Mbps may not be sufficient for even the lowest users.
1:55

Tim O'Sullivan:
Mark Steele - you can check on the BT.com website.
1:55

Matt Warman:
A couple of users asking for companies to be more public about their plans. Is that likely to happen more, as house prices etc are (anecdotally) being seriously affected by broadband speeds?
1:56

Comment From Ian Thompson
"It's a shame the usual suspects can't be as honest and open as Cyberdoyle, but not in least bit surprising... " .............. at last, some humour :-)
1:56

Comment From pete
it is crucially important for the economic future of the country that rural areas are accessed to decent , useable speeds - thats one very important way to ensure that these ares are revived, their economies flourish and their young people and entrepreneurs dont desert the countryside for the city. Ignore this issue and the countryside will slowly die.
1:56

Comment From James
As far as I understand virgin cable reaches 50% of the population therefore giving 10 million UK households the potential to have 50 meg (soon to be 100 meg) broadband at a cost of about £35 a month. Of these 10 million people only around 1% of households (around 100,000) have signed up for this service. Doesn't this tell us something about the actual demand for superfast broadband. The debate around broadband seems to be dominated by speed freaks where all that matters is speed for speed sake.
1:56

Comment From John/Salford
Cyber, I don't know if you watched that BBC Click episode but the village laid their own pipe to get setup themselves. They now have faster speeds than most and didn't beg for money from everyone else
1:56

Comment From Mark Steele
Thanks Colin - I've used the SamKnows many times in the past - it's a great resource
1:56

Duncan Higgins:
John, we don't cap our services. Also worth remembering that iPlayer is available on our TV service free of charge in broadcast quality and won't eat into our broadband connection. But to reiterate we don't cap!
1:56

Comment From Phil
Block youporn and xhamster and the country's data usuage will be more than halved ;-)
1:56

Comment From Steven
If we're looking at internet usage rollout as greatly as can be expected with incoming technology such as OnLive, Spotify and on demand television, existing infrastructure is not at all ready for many areas.
1:56

Ceri Stanaway:
Ah, but Virgin - you do traffic manage...
1:57

Comment From blue
i have a dacs on my line which BT will not discuss with me or indeed consider removing. I have only one line to my premises and therefor am unable to have braodband
1:57

Comment From Jonboy
Duncan, I'm only getting every second word - that's because you only cover half the country and not my area!
1:57

Comment From Phil Burrow
Duncan, you do throttle your services and send nasty letters out if people use the connection a lot.
1:57
MrSaffron:
#bbdebate blue on the Dacs - they are cost limits to when they will remove the Dacs, but getting to the right people is hard [via Twitter]
1:58

Duncan Higgins:
Ceri, Traffic management is a common practice across all ISPs and is there to ensure that all of our customers get the best quality of experience!
1:58

Matt Warman:
Two final questions for the panel: what do you think about Ed Vaizey's proposal to try to stop children looking at adult material on the internet, what advice would you give on broadband as a whole to Vaizey and Jeremy Hunt?
1:58

Louis Mosley:
Re. openness of company plans etc. it would be great to see a UK equivalent to the USA's national broadband map (www.broadband.gov). It will help the public to see the progress in investment in their communities and help to highlight where the need is greatest!
1:58

Comment From InfinityUser
Fibre services should be fast and hit headline claimed speeds; unfortunately my Infinity service is pathetic - how dare BT call it 'fibre optic' when it's just as badly affected by distance as other DSL services??
1:59

Comment From cyberdoyle
john/salford, the village in question is ashby in lincolnshire, they were close enough to get to a digital parish pump feed thanks to virgin and no thanks to BT who tried to charge them quarter of a million excess costs. the link to the story is here: http://ashbybookplus.blogspot.com/ and they pay £25 +vat a month for 1 gigabit within the community and 100 megabit internet.
1:59

Comment From Phil
Ceri, Virgin and all ISPs have to traffic manage. It's the only way to stop your neighbour consuming the whole street's data.
1:59

Comment From John/Salford
Duncan, you call the CAP a Fair Usuage Policy but in plain English its a CAP. You may have iplayer on your TV service but I don't have that and so I can't watch much streaming online because of your caps. You seem more occupied is speeds than giving customers the content they want in abundance
1:59

Tim O'Sullivan:
M Vickers /Blue.- drop me a line at public.affairs1@bt.com
1:59

Comment From Mark Steele
@ Tim - is that just my line speed or what future plans BT have for my exchange?
1:59
alwarman:
Is the Telegraph's broadband debate continuing online until 2015, are we limited to 1hr, or just until someone wins an argument? #BBdebate [via Twitter]
2:00

Comment From Phil
Matt, agree that something needs to be done to stop youngsters accessing adult material. Not sure what however.
2:00

Comment From Ian Bland
The advive Vaizey and (rhyming slang) Hunt should be given can't be publshed on a family website. Censoring the internet is an outrage. ISPs should firmly resist it as a bloc.
2:00

Comment From cyberdoyle
more books about community wifi, adsl resellers and fibre digs are available if anyone wants to swot up about it. http://www.lulu.com/lannison We have been JFDI for over a decade now.
2:00

Ceri Stanaway:
Agreed Phil, but it is a form of restriction, just like capping. I'm not saying it's unnecessary - it is vital - though ISPs must be up front about it.
2:00

Duncan Higgins:
Tim, one question in the context of speeds delivered - we noticed that a couple of months ago BT removed advice to their Infinity customers on what speed they are likely to deliver, as per what Virgin has already done, why did you do this?
2:00

Comment From Phil Burrow
How about parental supervision?
2:00

Ian Twinn:
Good to have the controls to stop porn etc so children are protected. But no one can save children from parents who by pass the controls. In a Big Society it is up to us all to have standards not for government to enforce them
2:00

Ceri Stanaway:
My advice to Vaizey and Hunt is to listen to what consumers need and want now, but with a mind to the future.
2:00
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate Define adult material? Is pornography worse than say Saw series, or racist chanting at a live streamed football match. [via Twitter]
2:00

Sam Crawford:
Censoring the adult material is a big ask of the service providers, not least because it's going to be very hard to pin down what it will cover. I'm sure the provider's here will chip in shortly!
2:01

Matt Warman:
Any thoughts on the porn question from Virgin?
2:01

Tim O'Sullivan:
On the issue of blocking adult content - there are a plethora of issues thrown up this. Not only definitions of adult content and who should be the judge and jury on such 'censorship' but also the practical technical and legal considerations that would have to be worked through. Bt offers parental controls and we believe such controls and education are the best way to approach he issue.
2:02

Comment From Rob
For interactive applications (and games, not a minority thing) low ping times are essential. Any chance providers could recognise this and not treat it as a frippery that it is childish to be concerned about? Possibly also give some sort of indication of typical values in marketing materials pls.
2:02

Comment From pete
john Salford - so a village set up their own bband pipe - did you lot in Salford have to do that then ? or was it provided on a plate to you ? that is my point . If its more expensive to provide for rural areas, then it is obviously mega cheaper and more profitable to provide for towns/cities...so maybe BT /Virgin etc etc should b using the mega£££ profits from the town/city developments to enable access for rural , more expensive areas. Isnt that logical ??
2:02

Comment From Ian Bland
ISPs should not acquiesce to being the State's privatised Vice Squad.
2:02

Comment From John/Salford
Ceri, if they invested in their networks instead of the million pound bonuses they wouldn't need to cap customers, only the people who really go to excess with 500GB per month
2:02

Comment From Mrs B Staunton
I live a 10 min. bus ride from the centre of Colchester and my speed is 0.5 because I am so far from the exchange.
2:03

Ceri Stanaway:
Interesting thought John/Salford...
2:03

Comment From Geoff
CyberDoyle - if its such a simple equation then why don't you JFDI yourself? you could be rich! hahaha
2:03

Duncan Higgins:
Advice to Vaizey and Hunt re adult content would be to focus on parental engagement and education. There needs to be a real drive to getting parents to understand the issue and the tools already available to assist them in restricting what their children see and do.
2:03

Comment From Steven
Parental supervision might be one of the best inventions of the 21st century. If only it were available today!
2:03

Comment From Phil Burrow
Nobody wants the internet to be censored for us. There are plenty of products available for parents, schools, libraries to censor their own computers if they want to. Broadband products could even be bundled with said software. "Child safe" broadband!
2:03

Matt Warman:
Thanks to all my panel - feel free to add your final thoughts below...
2:03

Comment From John/Salford
Porn should be left. We don't want a firewall around us like China
2:03

Comment From cyberdoyle
InfinityUser, it isn't fibre broadband unless its fibre right into your home. This is just marketing spin and hype, and the ASA is a spineless regulator who doesn't seem to understand physics. The exchanges feeding the copper phone lines are fed with fibre. That doesn't mean my dial up is fibre broadband. Or does it? guess it does come to think of it...
2:03

Comment From John/Salford
No Pete, we pay our bills so didn't get subsidised either
2:03

Louis Mosley:
I agree with Ceri and Tim panel on the porn question. It's the 'I can't tell you what it is but I know it when I see it problem'.
2:03

Ian Twinn:
great debate...thanks for all the thoughts
2:04

Sam Crawford:
Rob - You're absolutely right - performance goes far beyond raw speed. Latency, as you mention, is absolutely critical. That said, it's difficult for service providers to advertise on this metric sadly.
2:04

Comment From Ian Bland
Louis Mosley, why is porn a "problem" at all?
2:05

Comment From Steven
John, the companies are 'private' for a reason, they can do as they wish witht their own money for the most part. As for censorship, They're called 'Internet Service Providers' for a reason, they're there to provide 'internet service', not to acquiese to authoritarian demands
2:05

Tim O'Sullivan:
advice to Jeremy and ed would be to continue to priorities broadband investment. It should be a priority as a pillar of an economic growth plan. Also remember the other side of the coin - encourage take up, both across government and amongst businesss and consumers. That way the full benefits of the technology can be realised.
2:05

Comment From Paul
Waste of time.....we ask, ISP's lie, regulators hide and we're back to square one
2:05

Comment From Mark Steele
I would be more than happy with a reliable rural 2-3mb service than 100mb (wouldn't know what to do with it!). Please BT, can we have more info re exchanges and any future plans.
2:05

Comment From Paul
Sigh
2:06

Louis Mosley:
Yes, great debate. Thanks everyone! John Salford, do check out what the communities in Cumbria are up to on www.broadbandcumbria.com. DIY wireless networks et al. See you there.
2:06

Duncan Higgins:
Thanks to all. A very interesting debate. Certainly a lot for the industry to digest and move forward on. 2011 is a critical year for the future of broadband in the UK and Virgin Media looks forward to being at the very heart of that market evolution.
2:06

Ceri Stanaway:
I've been really interested to see all the comments today - which broadly support all that Which? has been calling for over the last few years and will help me loads going forward. We'll be responding to the ASA's consultations on broadband speed and 'unlimited' advertising to make sure the consumer view is represented - keep an eye on which.co.uk for the latest news on what we're up to in the broadband arena and share your views (there's also free tips on what you can do to improve your speed yourself - although sadly none of them will be as effective as ISP investment in networks). Thanks everyone.
2:06
MrSaffron:
#BBDebate the fact that money is going to be handed out actually means firms will be coy with exact plans to avoid missing out on subsidies [via Twitter]
2:07

Tim O'Sullivan:
Thanks to all for taking part. Really interesting debate and great to see so much interest in what is a critically important topic for the UK's future economic prosperity.
2:07

Matt Warman:
Thanks all - interesting stuff, and an issue I'm sure we'll all return to!
Please check out telegraph.co.uk/technology for more
2:08
yarwell:
Have the panel been & gone? GPRS link here :-) #bbdebate [via Twitter]
2:17
cyberdoyle:
@yarwell that was another fine bit of head banging. http://5tth.blogspot.com/ #digitalbritain 150 calories gone. will make tea #bbdebate [via Twitter]
2:19
cyberdoyle:
#BBDebate #digitalbritian RT @broadbandsupply: FTTH Technology vital for UK’s Future Broadband: http://bit.ly/eRd3Qq [via Twitter]
2:22
HmmmUK:
RT @alwarman: Is the Telegraph's broadband debate continuing online until 2015, are we limited to 1hr, or just until someone wins an argument? #BBdebate [via Twitter]
2:23
cyberdoyle:
#bbdebate RT @paulinerigby: This in-depth report on #FTTH is a must read RT @diffraxion FREE @ http://bit.ly/eMVGgW #digitalbritain [via Twitter]
2:24
HmmmUK:
@cyberdoyle It would pay you to shorten your website's home page for those of us on slow connections! :¬) #bbdebate [via Twitter]
2:24

Read more!