PDA

View Full Version : BDUK heading for rough waters ... might never happen



RobL
14-06-2012, 10:38 PM
Here's an article from Ian Grant who blogs often and accurately about the BDUK project sponsored by DCMS and Jeremy Hunt.

http://br0kent3l3ph0n3.wordpress.com/2012/06/14/cumbria-broadband-rejection-exposes-bduk-chaos/

Very difficult to see how taxpayer money can be well spent given this kind of commercial behavior by our government.

--RobL.

RobL
12-07-2012, 01:50 PM
And here's another article, explaining that Fujitsu have pulled out of the BDUK bidding process in Cumbria, leaving BT alone to fill that gap.

http://www.techweekeurope.co.uk/news/bduk-bt-fujitsu-cumbria-fibre-broadband-85755

This is close to our B4RN brethren who I'm sure are willing to fill the gap should that be required.

--RobL.

RobL
13-07-2012, 03:12 PM
BDUK funds stuck in Cumbria, inside piggy bank, no sweeties

An article from Computer World UK highlighting Tim Farron's (Lib Dem) view of the lack of action in Cumbria.

http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/public-sector/3369844/giving-bt-24m-for-cumbria-broadband-is-nonsense-says-mp/

An interesting read.

--RobL.

Yorkie71
16-07-2012, 11:28 AM
And here's another article, explaining that Fujitsu have pulled out of the BDUK bidding process in Cumbria, leaving BT alone to fill that gap.

Some reports also suggest that Fujitsu have pulled out from North Yorkshire (http://www.itproportal.com/2012/07/11/fujitsu-drops-bid-government-broadband-funds/) too, although I have not read any official release from Fujitsu as they did for Cumbria.

RobL
02-08-2012, 08:01 AM
Rural Broadband strategy criticised by HOL

After an extended period and many interviews with industry watchers the House of Lords have produced a critical report on our government's strategy to improving rural broadband services. I leave you to make your own mind up.

http://br0kent3l3ph0n3.wordpress.com/2012/07/30/lords-slam-governments-strategy-free-broadband-plan/#comment-1505

Enjoy,
--RobL.

RobL
21-08-2012, 11:41 PM
Here's an article published by the BBC website, where Jeremy Hunt admits FTTC (Fibre to the Cabinet) is no more than a medium term "solution".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19316824

Jeremy talks about much more, especially FTTH, but provides no indication of how or at what cost. It is difficult to imagine how the cost of around 28.8 billion could be found or provided (Analysis Mason report (http://www.analysysmason.com/About-Us/News/Press-releases1/BSG-publishes-costs-of-deploying-fibre-based-superfast-broadband/)), when the best our government can come up with right now is 830M of BDUK funding which can only go to BT assuming Fujitsu formalise their pulling out of the tender process. The government were telling themselves until now that this was going to provide the "best broadband in Europe (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110709203937/discuss.bis.gov.uk/bduk/)".

Perhaps the House of Lords report (http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/communications-committee/news/governments-broadband-strategy-risks-leaving-communities-behind/) and the surprising number of Community Fibre startups has felt like a wet trout across the face of some government broadband strategists?

Let's hope so.

--RobL.

RobL
14-09-2012, 10:31 AM
Here's an article from The Register, a renowned and often cheeky but reliable news source for all things Information Technology, on the latest BDUK status. Only BT and Fujitsu remain in the "bidding" for the 530M broadband procurement contracts, and it looks like DCMS is blacklisting Fujitsu. Ummm ... doesn't that make it a one horse race? Isn't our government deciding to give our tax money to BT without any effective competition? Isn't that against EU State Aid legislation?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/14/fujitsu_bduk_funds_status_according_to_dcms/

BT still have to bid for each project, and the local authorities have to accept what BT bid. One example in Lancaster resulted in Lancaster County Council deciding that what BT and Fujitsu were offering, for the 40M on offer, was not going to meet the target of 90% of Cumbria receiving 25Mbps or more by 2015. They rejected the proposal (http://www.nwemail.co.uk/cumbria-broadband-delayed-again-as-bt-and-fujitsu-bids-rejected-1.964718#), well done.

The likelihood of meeting that target in rural West Kent areas is equally remote, for all the same reasons. Lack of rural FTTC enabled cabinets, distance of properties from the cabinets, population density and unreliable speeds via VDSL2. It makes no commercial sense for BT or Fujitsu to attempt it! Let's watch the EU State Aid process and see what happens ....

Thanks,
--RobL.

RobL
17-09-2012, 09:04 AM
A recent article from Ian Grant on the inflated pricing and lack of disclosure of the "actual" costs to provide FTTC upgrades across the UK. If BT were to release the 3rd party invoicing related to the costs of deploying what they've already done, this would all surely just "go away"? Difficult to comprehend why they aren't doing precisely that.

BT masks ‘unjustified’ doubling of Final Third broadband bill (http://br0kent3l3ph0n3.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/bt-masks-unjustified-doubling-of-final-third-broadband-bill/)

BDUK's CEO Robert Sullivan declined to be interviewed, saying he was "not allowed to" speak to the press. This is public money, with substantial public interest ... a worrying response indeed.

--RobL.

RobL
12-10-2012, 09:17 AM
More information and figures about the BDUK funds and Openreach's engagement with the process. Kent County Council are embroiled in this process, which makes any ITT (Invitation to Tender) announcement very interesting - especially the dates "promised" by the responses from vendors. Will these be provided to KCC and the community? We at B4RS certainly hope so.

Perhaps there will be no promised "contractual performance" dates - which would send a clear community message that we really have to do this ourselves, rather than rely on a market and organisation that hasn't achieved Superfast Broadband in rural areas in the last 3 decades. Perhaps the truth will out during the ITT process, empowering KCC and other county authorities to engage directly with capable community projects? We watch and wait.

http://br0kent3l3ph0n3.wordpress.com/2012/10/12/superfast-broadband-roll-out-slows-to-a-crawl/

Enjoy,
--RobL.

RobL
13-11-2012, 01:07 PM
The latest criticism of the BDUK project was revealed today by The Register.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/13/millions_of_pounds_spent_on_70_broadband_consultan ts_by_uk_government/

9.8M spent, and delivered ... ummm ... very little. I believe Brussels is correct to block the payments, but only if our government has the cahoonies to fix the problem and compel BT to level the playing field. Look at what GEO do with dark fibre - other ISPs won't even consider selling it as they want to protect their "crown jewels". With the monopoly that Openreach has on physical infrastructure (the copper cable that gets to your house), nothing will change, and we all loose.

Rgds,
--RobL.

Kevin
20-03-2013, 08:38 PM
The latest news on BDUK is that Fujitsu have pulled out completely ;

http://www.broadbandchoices.co.uk/news/2013/03/rural-broadband-fujitsu-quits-180313

RobL
21-03-2013, 10:25 AM
Yes. We have the incumbent BT monopoly that the industry predicted would happen, despite our government spending 10m on building the BDUK procurement framework to avoid precisely that. It needs to change, and I believe there is a beginning of an understanding inside government that this is the case.