I disagree with your point that that case for new companies building new networks doesn’t exist. The evidence from Europe and US is that is does, and it is beginning to appear in the UK as well. That doesn’t mean they will dominate the market or that there won’t be casualties along the way but it most certainly exists.

The cost of providing a new network for those with slow or new speeds means the numbers do not work for a new company, unfortunately. Not helped by Sky providing TV and

The existing customer base of ISPs is key, they can be upgraded to faster services en masse providing the ISPs have wholesale access on terms (commercial and technical) they can live with.

Not sure about bundling. It’s been key to FTTH elsewhere but takeup of CATV isn’t great here and Freeview and Freesat provide a large chunk of what the 13m non-Sky households want for free.

I can see that actively bundling and promoting voice and TV services could work, but I think passively suggesting “it’s all out there on the internet – go find it” will flop.

The TV services about to come onto South Yorks Digital Region may provide a case study.

Many in urban areas aren’t interested in going faster, the connection they have is adequate for their needs. That is why all the noise is about ‘homes passed’ not homes connected. Most of the urban people could already have virgin ’100meg’ but they don’t see why they should if what they have works. Many don’t stream or videoconference, but all this is going to change. They just don’t realise the potential yet.

I think for new networks they should concentrate on helping the people who are desperate for an affordable, reliable connection. It will be a while before they make money, but a good network would sell itself. By the same token a poor network will not. Getting a USC of 2 meg to a rural business using public money and bonding copper pairs will not inspire others to take a service and many will still remain analogue. Get a fibre to them and they will soon spread the word amongst the neighbours. Whether its 30 meg, 100 meg or a gig, as long as its symmetrical, never drops out and delivers what it says on the box at an affordable price the network will soon grow, move into profit and start to encroach on the urban fringes stuck on the edges of copper. This will have a dual effect, not only will the customers have choice, real choice, but it will make incumbents up their game and start to deliver what they have promised the government. The days of ‘up to’ will be numbered…

Also alternative networks have the support of their communities, and if they are cooperatives they also keep the money local, and people have a pride in ownership and look after their asset. Help and support is local too, building a network of people, not just machines. I think local authorities should welcome initiatives from the grassroots and not try to force them all down the same route, there is no innovation in that, and if every county insists on handing all the bduk money to the incumbent then the whole job will be to do again in a few years, as all we will have done is made an old phone network go a bit faster. We need a modern network to keep up with the rest of the world, and the only way to do it is with fibre, with a proper wifi cloud over the country (not like btfon) and plenty of our own data centres. We could do it. But will we?

chris

They do exist, and not in just the new in take. They just need the platform to make a difference.

Until we break the monopoly which is throttling innovation and get some affordable backhaul into the rural areas we can’t build open access networks or any networks. The only way is economy of scale, and not many areas will work together at this moment in time, as they are all waiting for government help. Once people realise they are stuck on the wrong side of a digital divide they will start to work together. Like b4rn has.

As I pointed out to you, the data-book to support a bid to the RCBF contains little you wouldn’t need to complete a business plan should you be asking for funding from private sources; I see no reason why public bodies wouldn’t want to know that you have proof of demand, have a basic understand of your broadband landscape, your potential competition, and the offering you plan. If you think this is to challenging, perhaps you’d like to try a private equity house and see if they ask for less.

Also as pointed out to you, local authorities, including yours, have been willing to help communities to complete the application process, and in some cases have been willing to offer grants to help fund the process – don’t think the average private equity house does that.

Cabinets aren’t suitable for rural areas. BET is a total waste of space. Satellites are great for a quick fix, but too expensive for most people to run long term. Wifi is not up to it. Mobile hardly exists in rural areas. The only sensible solution to rural is fibre. New fibre networks can be expensive to install, and the ROI can be quite lengthy, but looking at it long term they are the most cost effective. The eventual Return on Investment is there, as is the enhanced quality of life, regeneration of rural areas, compliance with EU dictates, a break up of the monopoly which is throttling innovation in this country and altogether the Best Thing we could do if we want to see a digital britain in our lifetimes.

Broadband, roads, nuclear power, etc etc – basically anything where most of the money stays onshore.

In most cases councillors don’t engage with the solution at all, council leaders engage when there is cash by want a simple solution that doesn’t commit the council to a complex solution, and local authority officers have a tendency not to see solutions beyond BT. A pretty sweeping statement and there are of course exceptions but as rule of thumb that’s probably a fair generalisation (if a generalisation is ever fair).

Motivations for community wireless projects varied. Most I think didn’t expect to be in this game for the long-haul and were happy to shut down when an alternative solution came along. Some had unhelpful public funding constraints which were aimed at economic drivers rather than SME business drivers. And some were just bad businesses, like in any sector.

While I think communities for the most part have learnt from this experience, and there is evidence that some industry players are also beginning to develop a more nuanced approach largely from their European experiences (again, not all good), the public sector at national and local level hasn’t really moved on – except in some very welcome pockets.

At the moment communities feeling that their best option is to become part of their own broadband solutions are likely to find their sustainability will be enhanced by working with industry partners and damaged by working with the public sector. I hope this changes.

The base offer expected by BDUK is that the final 10% will be solved with some mix of wireless and satellite – just like pre-2005.

I think there is also somehow this sense that a community network is one exclusively run by the community and the community alone. That might have been the approach for early wireless networks and one or two NGA pioneers but it certainly isn’t the model adopted across Europe and its not likely to be the one adopted by sustainable, viable networks in the UK.

It is critical that this idea that community networks are small and amateurish. Those communities that can’t move on will fail and deserve to. But I see very little evidence of communities rushing to build fibre networks as they might have done early wireless ones. The vast majority recognise the difference in business model, longevity and complexity.

Its just a shame the public sector hasn’t seen that change, and that parts of the industry are clearly going to lose out while others begin to benefit from higher take-up, better loyalty and more sustainable partnerships.

Might be worth having a look at this: http://wooster.org.uk/2011/07/community-dead/

Let’s face it the notspots are still notspots 6-8 years after the ADSL1 rollout so the magic of “community” didn’t deliver to those areas.

The USC is met by satellite, isn’t it ?