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

TalkTalk plans to bring full fibre speeds of 1Gbps to three million premises in the UK, by creating an independent company with a total investment of around £1.5bn. Under the plans, the entity would be 20 per cent owned by TalkTalk and 80 per cent by infrastructure investor Infracapital. The ISP is also raising £200m in new …

  1. JakeMS
    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.

    1. IneptAdept

      Re: Good Idea.. but..

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

    2. 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

    3. 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.

    4. 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.

      1. 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.

        1. 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...

        2. 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.

          1. 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 *

    5. 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.

      1. 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.

        1. 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?

  2. 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 :/

    1. 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/

      1. 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.

      2. 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?

    2. 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.

      1. 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.

    3. 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...

  3. 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

    1. simpfeld

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

      1. ad47uk

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

      2. 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.

      3. 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)

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      upto 1gb

      but in reality ~14.4 kbps.

    3. 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.

  4. 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.

    1. 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.

      1. 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.

        1. 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...

    2. 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.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

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

    3. DaveTheForensicAnalyst
      Thumb Up

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

      1. 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".

    4. 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.

    5. 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.

  5. 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.

    1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

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

      1. 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)

      2. 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.

      3. 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.

    2. 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.

  6. 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.

    1. 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.

      1. 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.

        1. 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.

      2. 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.

        1. 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".

    2. 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?

    3. 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.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    How are they still alive?

    Talk Talk

    Balk Balk

    Walk Walk

    Jalk Jalk

    Yalk Yalk

    Galk Galk

  8. adam payne Silver badge

    It's all well and good having fibre put in everywhere but what is the point in having multiple fibre networks.

    One shared fibre network could be deployed faster with less disruption.

    1. SkippyBing Silver badge

      It's also one single point of failure and something of a monopoly, which tends to work against the interests of the consumer.

      1. Terry Barnes

        Only a monopoly if you consider FTTP a unique product that can't be replicated.

        I'm sure the competition authorities would consider the market definition to be broadband Internet access, of which a customer would have the choice of this FTTP from talktalk, four different mobile networks, fixed line access using BT's network, satellite broadband and maybe Virgin.

        Ford don't have a monopoly based on being the only company that sells Fiestas.

        1. SkippyBing Silver badge

          'Only a monopoly if you consider FTTP a unique product that can't be replicated.

          My point was if there was only one fibre network, which some are proposing, it would be a monopoly which tends to be bad for the consumer no matter who owns it. Obviously you could use mobile or copper instead but then you'd be stuck with an old technology or one that has its own limits on bandwidth as more people use it. So in that sense FTTP is a unique product.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      They can have multiple networks and then have the BGP routing to manage connections across the telecom provider equipment.

      As long as there is no QoS or non-neutrality on the traffic it should be OK. However if your BT fibre traffic is then going over a Virgin Media or Talk Talk and someone at Talk Talk decides to slow down Netflix traffic for non-Talk Talk users then there would be a call for a national fibre network.

      Openreach should really be classed as National Infrastructure - under the security control of CPNI and treated as such.

      Broadband should really be classified as a utility, the same as Gas, Electric and Water.

      1. MrZoolook

        Unless I'm mistaken, people don't get a choice in who they buy water from. It might not be a national monopoly, but each smaller regional water company is still a monopoly in that region.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I've had fibre broadband for years

    I never noticed any work going on in the street but I've apparently had fibre broadband for years.

    1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

      Re: I've had fibre broadband for years

      I never noticed any work going on in the street but I've apparently had fibre broadband for years.

      You've also got "up to" speeds for the theoretical maximum download speed with no contention ratio and the modem plugged directly into the exchange kit with 10cm of cable operating in a shielded, clean room.

      The "fibre broadband" business is where you don't have it, but the cabinet down the end of your road will. Or maybe the next one. Well, one of them somewhere anywhere will probably have fibre somewhere. Marketing...

  10. SImon Hobson Silver badge

    Single shared network ...

    Well a national single network seems to be what Australia is trying to do. From reading the stories in ElReg it looks like it's not going as planned ...

    But yes, if done correctly it would make sense. We could have a company who had lots of ducts, poles, cables, etc and in a position to sell capacity on that to all the ISPs. Win-win, one set of infrastructure - lower costs, better services. After all, we have one set of roads, one set of electricity cables, one set of water pipes, one set of drains, one set of gas pipes ...

    The services would be open, and they'd reach (nearly) everyone - so perhaps call them OpenReach. Just as long as they are independent and not doing what suits a single player with a vested interest in tilting the market in their own favour. Ah, I see the problem now :-(

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Single shared network ...

      "Just as long as they are independent and not doing what suits a single player with a vested interest in tilting the market in their own favour. Ah, I see the problem now :-("

      That would probably appear to happen in pretty much every imaginable model. BT is Openreach's largest customer, by far. Suppliers that do well generally respond to the needs of their biggest customers. If Openreach was sold to TalkTalk, BT would still be its biggest customer and its prices would still be set by Ofcom. TalkTalk-owned Openreach would earn more money from BT than from its own retail customers.

  11. Disgruntled of TW
    Megaphone

    Rebuilding the rural divide ...

    All these FTTP announcements are addressing urban areas where the ROI is better. We are rebuilding the "problem" that BDUK was intended to resolve - in the city you get fibre, in the country you get less, much less. Services will expand to use available bandwidth making statements like "I'm fine with 20Mbps" short sighted. Getting your HD video stream squeezed in-between full HDR 4K video will get less and less reliable .... your 20 Mbps today won't perform so well tomorrow due to noisier high bandwidth neighbours. On the public internet there ain't no QoS.

    The gubbermint needs to skip the inevitable decade of realisation and go full fibre everywhere NOW. Everywhere. NOW. Do it. Please. Being 3rd last in the EU table for FTTH is resolvable.

    That is all.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Please take your socialism away...

      In all seriousness, rolling out fibre across the countryside will cost buckets of cash. I don't want that cost added onto my urban connection.... unless, of course, the person who lives in the sticks and bought a 3000 square foot barn for the cost of my urban semi would like to subsidise my move to the detached place down the street?

      1. James 51 Silver badge
        Megaphone

        Re: Please take your socialism away...

        That person in the middle of nowhere could be a farmer. Farms and farmers could benefit a lot from good IT infrastructure and a fast, robust internet connection. Not just stuff like which market is paying the best prices for lambs today or reading about the developments in farm machinery but using drones to remotely inspect crops. Sensors to determine how moist the soil is. Videos of how to maintain their equipment, best pratice for fertiliser use etc etc. Productictivity boost in farming would benefit the whole country.

        Emergancy service gear is increasingly connected too.

        Without a good internet connection you're less likely to see new businesses setting up there or the ones that are there growing so you get an upward spiral in high density areas getting more dense and lower density areas getting less dense.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Please take your socialism away...

          "Farms and farmers could benefit a lot from good IT infrastructure and a fast, robust internet connection. "

          And they have them today. Farms that need serious infrastructure buy business grade leased-line Internet access, which can be delivered to pretty much anywhere in the UK. Businesses can afford the cost of gigabit or higher uncontended fibre services.

          "Emergancy service gear is increasingly connected too."

          Safety critical infrastructure does not get connected to consumer broadband networks that are built to be affordable, not reliable. Emergency service and other critical networks are built to five nines availability and they already exist.

          1. Roland6 Silver badge

            Re: Please take your socialism away...

            Businesses can afford the cost of gigabit or higher uncontended fibre services.

            You would have thought that, however, it is surprising how many small and SoHo business owners comment here on the quality of residential broadband and get upset when told to use leased line services...

            As for farmers, many just need sufficient and reliable bandwidth to access government/EU websites a few times a week, making leased lines an expensive overkill...

      2. Gio Ciampa

        Re: Please take your socialism away...

        "In all seriousness, rolling out fibre across the countryside will cost buckets of cash. "

        Fine... if you're happy to pay your own way - get your wallet out and pay us taxpayers back for everything we have paid for that you have used over the years...

      3. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: Please take your socialism away...

        unless, of course, the person who lives in the sticks and bought a 3000 square foot barn for the cost of my urban semi would like to subsidise my move to the detached place down the street?

        They are already subsidising your lifestyle!

        If it weren't for the people moving out of the cities, you wouldn't be able to afford your current home or move down the street. As whilst you might like the idea of having a queue of potential buyers for your property, I doubt you will like the idea of queuing yourself to join a bidding war to pay over the odd's for your new property down the street...

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Rebuilding the rural divide ...

      Being 3rd last in the EU table for FTTH is resolvable.

      Being third last in the EU table for FTTH is irrelevant, that's the wrong way of looking at it. All that counts is the speed and quality of the connection, and the availability at an affordable cost. In that respect, the cable network already provides equivalent speeds to those commercially likely from FTTH, so around 55% of the UK already have the possibility of connecting to a very high speed connection, but only what, around 1 in 5 homes passed by cable choose to connect (and most choosing speeds well below the 300 Mbps feasible). If the table also included homes that could at low cost connect to cable (or other local fibre networks) it would be more accurate - but that would show a different picture.

      Now, if over half the population have the chance, but only only 20% of those people being offered >80 Mbps connections actually want them, where's your case for an immediate national roll out of FTTH?

    3. Adrian 4 Silver badge

      Re: Rebuilding the rural divide ...

      Is ROI really better in urban settings ? Maybe in small towns where installation is cheap and there are lots of customers.

      But in larger towns, installation is expensive : it's so disruptive. Which is why many areas in central london still have dreadful broadband. Sticking an (albeit longer) cable in a grass verge is a doddle by comparison.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wonder what cap limit Talk-Talk will put on their fibre. Anything using that bandwidth will eat up any allowance.

    Wonder what the latency will be like?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Wonder what the latency will be like?

      Hopefully better than the shocking poor performance of Verminmedia's cable network when using the disgraceful Hub 3.

      Still waiting for that fix, Mr Mockeridge!

      1. David Roberts Silver badge
        Windows

        SH3

        One reason that I'm still running an original SH in modem mode.

        Only 160 Mb/sec but generally pretty solid.

        Watching with interest as more and more local poles sprout coils of fibre waiting to be run through the ducting.

        I sense a negotiating opportunity in the future.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Unpatched and vulnerable DSL kit and a mammoth hack ... no thanks. I'd rather have damp string and bean-cans.

  14. Tigra 07 Silver badge
    Mushroom

    BT doesn't really need to do anything to compete with Talk Talk since they won't exist in 2025.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Talktalk is dead/dying

    I predict that Talkalk as a company is so ill managed, that it will be taken over within 2 years, even before a street is dug up. (next year is when?). THey lie a lot.

    They just like to grab headlines, and Dunstone is an establishment man, so the press will support his hype.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Talktalk is dead/dying

      I predict that Talkalk as a company is so ill managed, that it will be taken over within 2 years

      By who? Even when new, the customer contracts are too short to give long term value certainty, the company has few owned assets, much of its operations are outsourced, and overall margins are modest. Also, when you make your business a "cheapest in the market, no standards at all" proposition, you don't look attractive to buyers because the customer base is very price conscious, and know how to switch. Look at energy company npower - absolutely incompetent, and have been for many years. They tried to sell the business for at least four years with no takers, and now there's a last chance effort to merge it with SSE, which is tantamount to admitting failure and giving it away. If that is blocked by the regulator, lord knows what npower will do, since they've got no money and no idea,

      The really valuable customers in these markets are those who have few good switching options (eg people on fast cable connections), or those who never switch at all. In both cases, that's where the money is made, a position true in telephony, energy, insurance, boiler cover and so forth.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Talktalk is dead/dying

        I think Sky is the logical suitor for Talktalk business. They are into IPTV (via youview) but Sky have the original programmings and access to a lot of content, which TT doesnt. They are also launching the new NOw tv stick to further enhance their TV presence. A lot of synergy to achieve.

        Besides, TT results dont make good readings lately and share prices have tanked. The cost of servicing the 3 million fibre connections will sink the company and stretch the already pathetic management and customer services. I even doubt this wil be lauched in due time. They have not yet even identified the towns/cities that wil get this Ftth. Its just wiilly waving to grab headlines when the financials are heading south.

        FFS, they could not even offer 4G on mobiles for 3 years, after grand announcements. And the divison closed.

        Mr Dunstone is a sharpy chap and he is seeing the light. Might just cash up.

  16. hatti

    No thank databreach you

  17. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

    I recently left Talk Talk

    And wouldn't go back to them if you paid me a large sum.

    It's not just the sieve that is their data protection (I doubt many other businesses are any better, they just got caught out), but also their appalling service provision - ADSL that slows to a crawl and drops out on a semi-regular basis, and their equally appalling customer service. Putting aside the Indian call centre (I've nothing against people from India, but it would be nice to be able to hear the person on the other end of the crappy VOIP line, and understand their accent), they once billed me £50 for an engineer call out for a fault on the line.

    The first engineer didn't turn up, and the one on the rebooked appointment came round, pulled out the neatly spliced CAT6e phone extension from the master socket, and moved all the furniture away from the wall, before actually bothering to test whether the fault was inside the premises (it wasn't). If I hadn't checked the bill, I wouldn't have noticed the charge, and if I hadn't spent 20 minutes arguing with the call centre operative, they wouldn't have reimbursed me.

    So, Talk Talk, I'm sorry, but you have joined the list of ISPs to be avoided, along with BT.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I recently left Talk Talk

      So, Talk Talk, I'm sorry, but you have joined the list of ISPs to be avoided, along with BT.

      Verminmedia are no better, from my own experience. Looking at sources like this:

      https://www.ispreview.co.uk/review/top10.php shows what looks like a strong inverse relationship between the size of a company and customer satisfaction. Unfortunately it also means that getting better service means paying the higher prices of smaller, better run companies. A clear case that you get what you pay for. Nothing to choose between Virginmedia, Sky, BT, Plusnet.

      In real long term pricing, the advantage of the big companies is wafer thin (most of their economies of scale are swallowed up by huge marketing budgets and their own operational incompetence), but they disguise this by having bigger up front promotional offers that dupe many people into going with them, followed by big price rises at the end of the contract period.

  18. anthonyhegedus Silver badge

    Talktalk's billing and customer service are beyond shite. But the network is good. Better than BT's in fact, and more flexible. Well, at least their wholesale offerings are more flexible. Who says you have to buy their fibre package off them?

  19. MartinB105

    TalkTalk crapiness aside, will people actually be able to take advantage of this?

    I have 200Mb/sec cable (and yes, I actually get 200Mb/sec!). But last year, I looked into ADSL options to save money. The various ISP's claimed to offer speeds of up to 500Mb, but when I contacted them for details, they all told me that I'd have to place their router in my electrical cabinet at the entrance to my apartment, which is at the opposite end of my apartment to my living room where all my connected devices are located (PC, consoles, TV, HTPC, etc.).

    When I asked how I was supposed to connect my devices, they just mumbled something about "wifi". So I'm being offered a 500Mb connection that will either be bottlenecked by horrible wifi, or I need to mess up my hallway by running ethernet cables from one end of my apartment to the other. They were absolutely no help in offering any options to actually get my devices connected to the service (isn't that the point of the service they're supposed to be offering!?).

    So naturally I decided to stick with my slightly more expensive cable Internet, where my router is in the living room right next to my PC.

    1. David Roberts Silver badge

      Helpful installation

      This is one area that VM shine (at least in my local area).

      They ask you which room you want the TV in and which room you want the router in and then run the cables as required.

      They don't charge for engineering visits in general, either. When our builders hit the cable whilst doing a bit of block paving they just came out and fixed it.

      The possibly lower up front cost of copper/fibre services may be attractive but it seems that the VM subscription includes free engineering support.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Helpful installation

        The possibly lower up front cost of copper/fibre services may be attractive but it seems that the VM subscription includes free engineering support.

        You were lucky. If you want something as trivial as the internal connection point moving, or even just a longer cable to reposition the hub, the thieves have a standard charge or £99. I would guess the only reason you didn't get stuffed with that was the billing incompetence of VM. And actual customer technical support for VM customers is appalling. Useless, crapbag offshore call centres staffed by script reading monkeys who can't problem solve, can't deal with anything not on the script, speak poor English.

POST COMMENT House rules

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

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019