nav search
Data Centre Software Security DevOps Business Personal Tech Science Emergent Tech Bootnotes
BOFH
Lectures

back to article
TalkTalk to splash £1.5bn laying full fibre on 3 million doorsteps

JakeMS Silver badge
Stop

Good Idea.. but..

Good idea... but TalkTalk? I wouldn't use this service for that reason alone. Well unless I want to be a victim of identity theft/fraud due to Talk Talk allowing everyone and anyone to have their customer data willy nilly.

IneptAdept

Re: Good Idea.. but..

Literally just posted this..... Ninja'd

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Good Idea.. but..

If I were stuck between a choice of Talk Talk fibre and a 8Mb line elsewhere...

i'll open a second bank account and use talktalk :D

Stuart 22
Pint

Re: Good Idea.. but..

Oh no. Please Mods just cut'n'paste the comments from the last TalkTalk fiasco report and close this so we can froth at the mouth down the pub instead. Saves time, bitter tastes better.

While you are about can you cut out the stock image on the frontpage with some vague connection to a tedious story and replace it with a loop of Thunderbirds 1 & 2 landing simultaneously on Cape Canaveral obviously filched from the discarded film stock bin at Shepperton and pretending its really real - a bit like TalkTalk's broadbind.

Just kiddin'. Elon you are magic. With knobs on.

ad47uk

Re: Good Idea.. but..

Agree with you about not using Talk Talk, even without the hack I would not use Talk Talk.

Full fibre is fine for people who needs the speed, i am fine with 38Mbs to be honest, so even if full fibre came here unless the price was the same as what I am paying now i would stay as I am.

TBH, if ADSl could offer me 8Mbs at least I would go back to that.

Reliability is more important than speed. for me, but I do need a certain amount of speed to watch HD video.

Chewi

Re: Good Idea.. but..

Does this necessarily mean using TalkTalk as an ISP though? I'm with A&A and I have a BT line (resold via A&A) but use the TalkTalk backhaul. This gives me no problems and RevK's blog gives the impression that their backhaul is just as good as BT's.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Good Idea.. but..

"[...] but I do need a certain amount of speed to watch HD video."

I watch BBC iPlayer and YouTube HD videos. Smooth on a max 10Mbps ADSL.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Good Idea.. but..

I doubt TalkTalk will Wholesale as it makes the case to invest way, way harder. No-one would unless forced to by regulation.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Good Idea.. but..

Not entirely sure why you were downvoted; even a 1080p60 youtube stream rarely exceeds 6Mb/s bitrate overall, and I don't think iplayer shows anything more than 720p50, usually maxing out at around 2.5Mb/s. They'll fit down a 10Mb/s pipe without even touching the sides. I don't use them myself but I can't imagine other streaming video services being vastly different...

paulf Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Good Idea.. but..

@AC: "I doubt TalkTalk will Wholesale as it makes the case to invest way, way harder. No-one would unless forced to by regulation."

Not sure I agree with you. If they were forced by regulation to wholesale at the levels applied to Openretch then, yes, it probably wouldn't be worth the investment. If they choose their own wholesale price (which they probably could do as they don't have market dominance, unlike Openretch) they could make a profitable product - they supply the line and someone else does the customer stuff (signing customers, support, billing &c).

The TT board discussion would more likely be - if we keep this to ourselves and don't wholesale, will we make more money having it as a selling point than if we wholesale to others and have multiple ISPs getting Bums on seats?

macjules Silver badge

Re: Good Idea.. but..

Now try that in a house with 3 teenagers who think bandwidth is something that Grandad had with his 56k modem, and who fail to understand that 3x "I MUST have 5mbps for homework" equals 15mbps which seems to be mostly beyond the capability of BT OpenRetch.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Good Idea.. but..

Openreach is used for all networks. I received this from they around my several year delay to get fibre...

Thanks for contacting us about fibre.

I've had a look into this for you and can see the cabinet x of the x exchange has an ongoing project to upgrade it to be fibre ready.

I'm afraid we can't give any completion dates just yet as the FTTC(Fibre to the cabinet) project is currently on hold. We place projects on hold for lots of reasons, but due to the number of variables involved it's impossible to give a completion date that would be accurate.

Also, I've checked if there are any plans for FTTP(Fibre to the Premises), unfortunately there are no plans to provide FTTP services as of now.

When the fibre service is available for you and orders can be accepted, this information will be given via this link:

https://www.homeandbusiness.openreach.co.uk/fibre-broadband/when-can-i-get-fibre

We can also get in touch with you directly as soon as we know more or have fibre available. Ask them to simply click on the link below and fill in the details:

https://www.homeandbusiness.openreach.co.uk/expression-of-interest

Once you've signed up we'll get in contact with you as soon as we have further information about the upgrade.

Best wishes,

* sigh *

IneptAdept

Sooooo Talk Talk are looking to do more than OpenReach

Although I would never signup for TalkTalk what has the world come to when they are doing more for Fibre than OpenReach :/

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Sooooo Talk Talk are looking to do more than OpenReach

You clearly missed this where they aim to have that many in half the time.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/02/01/openreach_ups_full_fibre_investment_plans_to_3_million/

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Sooooo Talk Talk are looking to do more than OpenReach

Talk Talk will get to keep all the revenue from every customer they sign up. Openreach get to keep whatever the line rental on fibre is - say £10 a month - and the rest goes to the ISP.

One of those models is easier to get investment for than the other.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Sooooo Talk Talk are looking to do more than OpenReach

We all know BT hover over their dead carcass of legacy copper/alu broadband like vultures, while proclaiming the vapourware wonders of Pointless G.fast.

BT talk the talk, but delay and delay, obstruct progress, sit on their hands like the local drunk blocking the pub doorway, drinking with their fcuk buddy Ofcom.

Everyone has had enough listening to the combined bullshit, forced into the situation of stepping over/ bypassing a couple of very pally luddites. Better to do it yourself independently, obviously.

Roland6 Silver badge

Re: Sooooo Talk Talk are looking to do more than OpenReach

No TalkTalk are talking of do more than Openreach, but what is significant is the timing of the announcement, it comes after Openreach's submission to Ofcom. It will be interesting to see Sky's announcements on its position with represent to TalkTalk (are they going to join in?)

Hence it would seem that Ofcom can have no reasonable objection to the Openreach proposals, as they haven't prevented competition from entering the market.

Now the question is, if Ofcom give Openreach the go ahead, whether TalkTalk actually go ahead or quietly shelf their proposals and continue to use Openreach...

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Sooooo Talk Talk are looking to do more than OpenReach

> One of those models is easier to get investment for than the other.

Yep: the one where the monopoly incumbent gets to keep the majority of the revenue (e.g. £18.34+VAT for FTTP 80/20 wholesale), and the resellers are the ones who get their margin squeezed as they compete.

paulf Silver badge
Terminator

Re: Sooooo Talk Talk are looking to do more than OpenReach

FTA: "TalkTalk plans to bring full fibre speeds of 1Gbps to three million premises in the UK..."

Openreach: Openreach ups investment plans: Will shoot out full fibre to 3 million premises

I wonder if they'll target [largely] the same 3 million properties or completely separate sets of 3 million properties?

Ochib

Good news you will be able to get upto 1gb

Bad news It will be throttled and subject to a fair use policy

Worse news you will need to use TalkTalk

simpfeld

And given TalkTalk still can't even do IPv6, should we trust them to deliver 1Gb without CGNAT!

ad47uk

The provider i use now do not do IPv6, it makes not one difference to me what so ever.

Tigra 07 Silver badge
Facepalm

RE: Simpfeld

Talk Talk has probably lost all their customers info and details (again) just since this article went up.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

upto 1gb

but in reality ~14.4 kbps.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Even worse when you decide to cancel their service (as I id this morning) you talk to "Michael" who has a very very heavy Indian accent who needs to verify your address, which you give him and he says that's not the address they have on the account. Eventually after several attempts I discovered their version of my address is prefixed by the word "Apartment" and he could not accept a prefix of "Flat" or accept just the number without the prefix, nor give any clues about the issue. "Michael" then tried to get me to take my service to my new home. No. Give it to someone else. No (I'm not that cruel). Pay the £20.09 early cancellation fee. Yes please.

After that it was just the expected reading me the terms and conditions putting me on hold while he did "something". No more than a 30 minute call in total, but by the end of it I was begin to suspect that "Michael" wasn't his real name and I was half expecting him to tell me that there was a virus on my computer.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

> And given TalkTalk still can't even do IPv6, should we trust them to deliver 1Gb without CGNAT!...)

Given that TalkTalk inherited the carcasses of many different ISPs (Tiscali, World Online, Carphone Warehouse, Opal, Pipex, Nildram, LineOne, Homechoice, Telinco etc) they probably have more than enough IPv4 space to keep them going indefinitely in the UK marketplace, at one address per customer.

https://bgp.he.net/AS13285#_prefixes

https://bgp.he.net/AS9105#_prefixes

https://bgp.he.net/AS8586#_prefixes

https://bgp.he.net/AS43234#_prefixes

https://bgp.he.net/AS12708#_prefixes

https://bgp.he.net/AS134712#_prefixes

The first link alone includes a /11 netblock (2 million IP addresses), eight /14's (another 2 million addresses), two /13's (another 1 million)

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

How much overlap will this have?

How many customers will have access to BT Fibre, Talktalk Fibre and Virgin Cable?

Would it not be better to force providers to upgrade or install in areas where the others are not operating first? I understand that would limit choice to begin with but at least you have one choice rather than none.

Doctor Syntax Silver badge

"Would it not be better to force providers to upgrade or install in areas where the others are not operating first?"

Then it wouldn't happen. If they can't pick the areas where they reckon they have best RoI they won't do it.

JetSetJim Silver badge

I'd be surprised if they had any significant overlap, as then there would be less incentive for take-up.

What I'd like is for Ofcom to finally start slapping BT for calling their Superfast Broadband "fibre" when it's FTTC, rather than FTTP.

DaveTheForensicAnalyst
Thumb Up

Totally agree, lets get some fibre everywhere, before we aim for awesome fibre in one city, but dial-up somewhere else.

John Sager

This is one of the arguments for having a non-profit do the fibre build-out & then rent capacity to ISPs. But for heaven's sake don't let the government anywhere near the planning & build activity! The big problem of course is how to incentivise the non-profit to maximise capacity and reach whilst minimising cost, and to keep the network upgraded as technology & service requirements allow.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Let's start by calling pure/full FTTP (fibre optic) - fibre, and FTTC - 'up to' obfuscated, bamboozled "copper to the premises".

Mike Scott 1

Yep, areas with fibre get more fibre. Areas that don't, well don't.

Good for the digestion in those areas, the rest of our guts can rot.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

and do the same to Virgin maybe ? Amazing how they squeeze light down coax cables :)

Roland6 Silver badge

This is one of the arguments for having a non-profit do the fibre build-out & then rent capacity to ISPs. But for heaven's sake don't let the government anywhere near the planning & build activity!

Whilst I agree with you, the real opportunity to do this some years back when the government initiated the BDUK programme; which just goes to show don't let the government define the terms of reference either...

David Roberts Silver badge

All or (virtually) nothing?

We have VM cable with 12 up 160 down.

The OpenReach line checker shows FTTC with a maximum of around 50 down.

Telephone poles are sprouting fibre terminations with reels of fibre waiting to be pulled through the ducts.

I have no idea if Talk Talk are planning a roll out of fibre to add to the mix. Noting that unless they get access to the poles there is likely to be a lot more cost compared to the OR deployment. This in turn makes me wonder if OR will quickly roll out FTTP in any area where TT apply for planning permission (or whatever) to dig up the roads and pavements.

James 51 Silver badge
FAIL

You'd think that investing in the fundamental infrastructure requires to survive as a business would put shares up, not down.

Pascal Monett Silver badge

Yeah, but investors bought shares for the dividends, not because they're interested in the company's activity.

Death_Ninja

I thought it was quite good for a company to tell investors that they were paying for the investment with their dividends.

Makes a change for the stock market to actually be about something real (although obviously it upsets the pin stripe w@nkers a lot)

Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

re: Investors

Yeah, but investors bought shares for the dividends, not because they're interested in the company's activity.

and only what happens in the next 90 days. Plans about investments outside the next quarter are seen as negative in their view of the world. This short termism are be the downfall of many a company. I've even seen one with a full order book for the next TWO years go under because they could not get a line of credit extension for more than 90 days. When their products take at least 120 days to make they had no choice but to shut up shop. Madness.

FlossyThePig

Not just Dividend

@ Pascal Monett - I think that just about sums up what is wrong with the Stock Market. It's not just dividends though.

The barrow boys at the Stock Exchange treat shares as simple commodities to be bought and then sold at a profit. Now we have computer trading where an advantage for trading is based on milliseconds.

Unfortunately now that most peoples' pension funds rely on the Stock Market we are stuck with it.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

"You'd think that investing in the fundamental infrastructure requires to survive as a business would put shares up, not down."

It's much riskier than just leasing parts of BT's network or buying white-labelled wholesale products.

The general expectation amongst investors regarding Telecoms is "Build it and go bust". Infrastructure is hard and there's a very real chance of price declines meaning that it becomes impossible to pay back the original loans - as happened with the cable companies in the 90's. At that point a rival comes along and picks up your assets in a fire sale for peanuts. Better to be an investor in that rival than in the company that did the building.

HmmmYes Silver badge

Why?

Talk Talk business model/structure is based on using other companies infrastructure, signing up customers and doing nothing, bar leaking the customer information.

Owning cables and the like means it has to do and manage something.

Should be fun.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

>Why?

This smacks of both canal and railway mania where so many companies will be digging up roads and pavements to lay competing different fibre networks. There must be some better way that maximises resources and limits disruption by companies sharing infrastructure such as a national fibre network then add capacity as needed. After all a vast majority will only need one FTTP connection at any one time.

I just find it disheartening to waste resources when we live on a planet with limited amounts.

SkippyBing Silver badge

'There must be some better way that maximises resources and limits disruption by companies sharing infrastructure such as a national fibre network then add capacity as needed'

Well you could try a command economy but they don't seem to run that efficiently either.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

>Well you could try a command economy but they don't seem to run that efficiently either.

Neither do theoretical purely capitalist economies, government does not exist in extreme capitalist theory, it would be anarchy or to use the coined term, anarcho-capitalism.

Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

re: Owning cables and the like

No more passing the buck to BT/Openretch when there is a fault. No more saying that if there isn't a fault then you have to pay through the nose... etc etc etc.

I wonder if the TT BOD has thought through the implications of this?

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

> Talk Talk business model/structure is based on using other companies infrastructure

That's a bit unfair - they have a large LLU rollout, which means they have their own equipment in BT exchanges (DSLAMs for DSL only, MSANs for data and voice), and their own backhaul links.

However in the Brave New World of FTTC/G.Fast and FTTP, all this reverts to the old model where OpenReach owns and runs all the active network equipment, shared by all ISPs.

There doesn't seem to be any discussion of unbundling fibre, and that would admittedly be quite tricky for GPON as it would require customers to be patched to the right optical splitter.

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

....."such as a national fibre network"...

You mean OpenReach, the company that inherited FOC copper and preferred to squeeze every last penny out of it rather than manage and remove copper from ducts and lay fibre in their place?

You can either have a "national something" or a "quality something" but expecting a "national quality something" is a bit of a Unicorn.

Roland6 Silver badge

> the company that inherited FOC copper and preferred to squeeze every last penny out of it rather than manage and remove copper from ducts and lay fibre in their place?

You are overlooking the key role Ofcom (previously Oftel) has played: in trying to create a 'competitive market' they prevented BT from investing in fibre, in some respects if BT hadn't already started the upgrade of their core network to fibre, Oftel would have blocked it, instead they prevented BT from deploying fibre in the local loop...

So you can have a "national quality something" at reasonable cost, if you drop the dream of having a "competitive market".

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing