Cabling roads

[mcauslene]

Are there any plans afoot to cable any more areas in the near future? I am currently unable to receive cable services. With the merger, do you think it is possible we will see roads being dug up again? I understood the reason for halting was lack of money.
However, if NTL/Telewest want to compete with Sky, surely they have to be able to reach as many people as possible. Though Sky is superior for the TV, I'd love to have NTL broadband when it goes onto 10Mbit as I am currently unable to receive higher than 1Mbit on my current ADSL line.

[SMHarman]

The merger press releases at present indicate no. I imagine they have plans to integrate the current networks and ensure that all services can reach all users prior to expansion.
Are you in an area they have cableing rights to?

[Chrysalis]

NTL we now know have money with all the recent news going out, but will they spend it expanding their cable footprint? In my opinion no.
__________________

Originally Posted by SMHarman

The merger press releases at present indicate no. I imagine they have plans to integrate the current networks and ensure that all services can reach all users prior to expansion.
Are you in an area they have cableing rights to?

I was told they not going to make their services universal covered as some area's they deemed as unviable to upgrade.

[jrhnewark]

Originally Posted by mcauslene

With the merger, do you think it is possible we will see roads being dug up again? I understood the reason for halting was lack of money.

There's still a lack of money, all this takeover will achieve are some minimal economies of scale. Perhaps more substancial if they find a way of killing off staff, so to speak.

However, if NTL/Telewest want to compete with Sky, surely they have to be able to reach as many people as possible.

But cabling up more areas of the country with coax is just a daft idea - that's the reason both companies ended-up in massive debts!

The future is ADSL2+ - we're already hitting problems with the cable network as people are stuck on 38Mbps links (it's my belief that as speeds get higher, people won't be able to achieve full speeds on any platform; once they reach a certain stage, thankfully they won't care). Stick four new 10Mbps people on that link, and they'll (possibly) soon realise that they're 0.5Mbps short...

Anyway, I digress. The main cost - the backbone for ADSL2+ - is already there. I grant that those who can only get 1Mbps on ADSL might be a little stuffed for the time being, but the majority of people who can get max speeds will get 20Mbps+ on ADSL2+. I had a graph of it somewhere.

Think about it from the cable cos' point of view. You can make every urbanish town in the country 'triple play ready' without digging up one street, but you could dig up every street in the town you wish to service. What do you do?

Digging up the streets was a silly mid-90s progressive looking idea that wasn't, isn't really progressive. In the words of whoever that beer company are, "you can't rush these things". Or something like that. Other systems/ideas are also living proof of this. There must have been something in the air.

[mcauslene]

Well, I wouldn't mind, but I'm on a retro-exchange that has no chance of being upgraded for the time being. I'll sit and wait for ADSL2+. Could be years, though.
I live in a new (well, 18 months old now) house, and at the time they had no plans of cabling this road back then, I was hoping they had changed their opinion. I only moved about 1/4 of a mile, the houses at the bottom of the garden are cabled, in fact, the cable runs about 10m away from my house.

[jaycee]

ADSL2 is rubbish, as is ADSL itself... you're talking about putting high speed data over miles of copper (in some cases aluminium) wire that is in most cases over 80 years old.

QAM256 technology and A-TDMA easily allows 30MBit up and downstream per user. Cable technology hasn't stood still while ADSL technology develops

Indeed ... I thought I understood that the pay-off for the greater speed of ADSL2 is a reduced effective range from the exchange.

You are never going to be able to put twisted copper wire up against coaxial cable and say that the copper is going to win. A good quality cable infrastructure is simply better. It's just physics.

I believe that physical expansion of the UK cable network is years off, but once they eventually get a single, unified company with single, efficient management systems, there will be money available for more cabling.

[Cerberus]

On a side note:

In the words of whoever that beer company are, "you can't rush these things".

Grolsch?

Ok back on topic now.

[jrhnewark]

Originally Posted by Chris T

You are never going to be able to put twisted copper wire up against coaxial cable and say that the copper is going to win. A good quality cable infrastructure is simply better. It's just physics.

But it might not be economics.

(Yes, it is Grolsch. )

Originally Posted by jrhnewark

But it might not be economics.

(Yes, it is Grolsch. )

Absolutely, it isn't economics - yet. That's why they aren't cabling at the moment, and won't for some years. But it's nonsense to suggest that NTL will never consider new infrastructure. A company has to continue to grow because that's how you 'enhance shareholder value', and that is the reason PLCs exist. There is a limit to their expansion on their existing network. When every potential customer has all three services, where do they go then? And, when they need to expand the network, they aren't going to do it with copper twisted pairs. In the long term, even BT will abandon that for something a little less Victorian.

[Chrysalis]

if they got no money then what are they using to bid for the premiership football?

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

if they got no money then what are they using to bid for the premiership football?

Oh, they've got money alright ... but they have to consider how quickly they'll get a return on it. They will get premiership cash back relatively quickly, but investment in the infrastructure is much more long-term. Also, Premiership footy is not going to be as expensive in future as it has been, seeing as Sky is being barred from having a monopoly on it. Once Sky is out of the picture, the other contenders can bid far more realistic (i.e. lower) figures to secure the rights.

[handyman]

I do see ukcable expanding the networks, perhaps not in the mad rush it was done in the past but maybe they will start off the new build networks with fibre to the street and make it even better perhaps even the fabled fibre to the home. I think the major benefit of the cabled areas is the way they can intergrate many technologies into one package. They already have siamese drop cable that deliver 3 pairs of telco and a coax why not add in fibre?

AFAIR it costs £800 per property to cable it. If they get £70pm per property that means a whole year and they have only just recovered the build costs.

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by handyman

snip>
AFAIR it costs £800 per property to cable it. If they get £70pm per property that means a whole year and they have only just recovered the build costs.

That is working on every property passed being connected which is not going to happen. Areas that have not yet been cabled will have had their potential customers taking alternatives such as Sky, BT and ADSL and it would take some serious discounted offers to tempt them to change, particularly if they have seen the advantages of Sky+. These discounted offers will further extend the return period for the capital expenditure.

[Chrysalis]

Well I think ntl (and telewest) have a moral obligation to make their service's universally equal before they start trying to do things like this, I also happen to think if ntl own cable franchise rights to an area they have no intention of cabling up they should allow someone else to purchase those rights.