This topic

FTTP - close but no cigar

GJBPH2 — Fri, 03 Oct 2025 08:52:15 GMT

Openreach contractors installed fibre in our hamlet last year. Most of the houses in the hamlet can now access FTTP, and some have already done so. However, the pole that serves our house and that of a few close neighbours with the existing copper service, is off the main road by about 30m, and has no fibre run to it. So we can't get FTTP.

Openreach tell me they have no plans to change the availability in the short term, and we'll either need to wait a few years until it's eventually installed, or pay for Fibre On Demand, which apparently costs £8k upwards. The thing is, they won't tell me why they can't just run a fibre from the existing connection on the pole at the end of our track, to the house, via the existing pole if required. It's a run of maybe 50m.

Does anyone know if there's a technical reason for this, or is it just a 'computer says no' situation? I presume that sufficient capacity was installed to cover the whole hamlet when the fibres were run from the exchange last year. It would make no sense whatsoever to have to dig up the road verges again to lay a separate fibre bundle at a later date.

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

iniltous — Fri, 03 Oct 2025 09:47:13 GMT

The first thing to point out is this is a BT Consumer forum , BT has no more or less influence on what Openreach do or don’t do , than any other communication provider, so it’s not a question within BT’s gift to answer and relatively pointless asking BT about OR decisions.

As far as generally why can there be an ‘island’ of no FTTP availability within an area that generally can get FTTP , it’s usually a financial decision , there is a budget per dwelling and OR’s mission right now is to get the most ‘bang for their buck’ …quick wins , addresses that can be served with minimal expenditure are done , relatively expensive addresses are not .

Often telegraph poles are not served by duct , the copper cables that exist are buried directly in the ground to the base of the pole …..this may not be a problem if a there are a series of poles and they have a line of sight to each other as the fibre distribution can be fed overhead ‘in line of route’ between them , one pole feeding the next pole with an overhead fibre cable , so only one pole needs a duct access , to get access to the others , but if an individual pole can’t be served directly overhead from another pole ( with regard to maximum span length as well as line of sight visibility and with regard to the maximum number of cables that can be ran in parallel, ) then the costs to either supply a feeder pole if it’s a span length issue ( should a public space be available for siting a new pole ) or the cost of providing a duct to the pole from the underground duct network almost certainly tips those houses served from that pole into a ‘too expensive to consider’ category…

These addresses basically are deferred to a time when budgets allow which seemingly is what you have already been told .

Not using actual figures or necessarily being exactly your circumstances , but to give a nod to the way decisions are made , if some properties that can get FTTP had a aggregate construction cost of £80 per dwelling, they cost in ….but a single ‘stranded’ pole required £5k of construction to serve 10 properties, possibly a ducted feed to the pole , or a feeder pole sited on private property for example, then that £500 per dwelling makes them uneconomic to provide, after all that £5k , spent somewhere else where £80 enables a property, represents 62 addresses…if it were your business and you had to spend the budget, would you spend it to do 10 houses or 62 houses somewhere else ?.

If the pole that feeds you does have a line of sight to another pole that has FTTP available , and is within the allowed span length , doesn’t infringe DILOR , that’s the number of cables ran in parallel, and would meet the minimum height requirements etc, it’s odd to miss out these addresses ….if you have enquired and still been told ‘No’ presumably there is a compelling reason .

https://www.openreach.com/forms/fibre-broadband-availability---customer-form

You can fill this formwize out , a section along the lines of my neighbours can get FTTP but I can’t , will get OR to check if it’s an error , but if you’ve already asked , then the answer you get probably will be the same

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

chrisjp — Fri, 03 Oct 2025 13:02:08 GMT

What's a cigar got to do with FTTP?

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

GJBPH2 — Sat, 04 Oct 2025 17:23:12 GMT

You are correct, sorry - this is probably not the most appropriate forum to ask the question. However, having said that, you have answered it perfectly, so thank you for that.

It looks like the reason must be primarily financial, because the small cluster of houses that can't receive FTTP would require a separate line to be run to our pole. There is a manhole cover next to it, which would suggest a duct, but that's not certain. There's also the question of land ownership. The houses in question are served by an unmade track of questionable ownership (none of the neighbours seem to know who owns it; our title deeds only show right of access), and it is on the verge of this track that the pole is sited.

I have already filled in the form on Openreach's website. But at least I know now why we need to wait.

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

Kodikid — Sun, 05 Oct 2025 10:15:26 GMT

Hamlet...cigar....brilliant

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

Kimberlin — Sun, 05 Oct 2025 12:09:22 GMT

@Kodikid Quite literally, no one born after 1991 will have a clue what you're talking about. I did however find that quite amusing.

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

peterh0001 — Mon, 06 Oct 2025 08:57:26 GMT

@Kodikid @Kimberlin In fact this has nothing to do with the Hamlet advert but sten

Ms from the USA in the early 20th century. The prize at fairgrounds for games of skill was often a cigar and if the punter got close to the target but missed the barker would say close but no cigar. Not much to do with fibre broadband 🙂

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

iniltous — Mon, 06 Oct 2025 09:05:35 GMT

Must be a generational thing , I got both the original reference ‘close but no cigar’ and the Hamlet and cigar reference, I dare say most ‘boomers ’ wouldn’t need it explaining , but younger folk probably would .

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

Kodikid — Mon, 06 Oct 2025 09:59:36 GMT

Honestly didn't need explaining the cigar reference, but appreciate the patronising tone.

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

chrisjp — Mon, 06 Oct 2025 12:58:20 GMT

I must be an unusual boomer then, because I was totally mystified by this phrase!
I'd assumed it was some sort of bizarre auto-correct action on the OP's computer/mobile

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

Kimberlin — Mon, 06 Oct 2025 13:09:32 GMT

@chrisjp Just YouTube Hamlet cigar advert compilation. Brought back some memories and they were fairly amusing.

Re: FTTP - close but no cigar

pddco — Mon, 06 Oct 2025 14:02:49 GMT

Hamlet, a mild cigar, found under benches and hedges..