Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

SpaceX’s Starlink service, which offers ultrafast broadband speeds via a mega constellation of satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), has notified the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the USA of their intent to launch a new Wi-Fi router for their customers – model code UTR-251. The new kit appears positioned to replace the previous Gen 3 (UTR-231) kit, but it has some caveats.

At present Starlink has over 7,200 satellites in Low Earth Orbit (c.3,300 are v2 Mini / GEN 2A) – mostly at altitudes of c.500-600km – and they’re in the process of adding thousands more by the end of 2027. Residential customers in the UK typically pay from £75 a month for a 30-day term, plus £299 for hardware on the ‘Standard’ unlimited data plan (inc. £19 postage), which promises latency times of 25-60ms, downloads of 25-100Mbps and uploads of 5-10Mbps.

However, every 2-3 years the operator does tend to refresh their broadband routers and dishes with new kit, which often reflects enhancements to previous services and support for new features. At present it is already known that Starlink are developing a higher performance dish (terminal) / package, which will support their aim of reaching gigabit broadband speeds.

The news of a new router, as spotted by PC Mag, may well feed into the above plans. But it is also likely to end up supporting other plans too. The UTR-251 currently looks likely to be a fully-fledged Gen 4 router to replace the older Gen 3, which itself was only first introduced in 2023. The new kit looks designed to stand upright, much like the older Gen 2 kit, but it’s also a step back in terms of only having a single Ethernet port (the Gen 3 had two) and can only be used indoors (not rugged).

Otherwise, the new kit appears to have similar WiFi specs to the Gen 3, but enhanced support for additional radio frequency bands has been introduced to help boost broadband speeds on the satellite connection itself. The new router is also expected to be more power efficient than the existing model, although we will only know for sure once that can be tested in the wild.

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

A couple of years have now passed since ISPreview last examined how much money broadband ISPs were charging consumers for their gigabit broadband (1Gbps) tiers, so we’ve decided to take another look to see how things have changed between 2022, 2023 and 2025. But it might surprise some readers to learn that prices have broadly continued to fall.

The following article will only be covering residential networks delivered via either Full Fibre (FTTP/B) or Hybrid Fibre Coax (Virgin Media) infrastructure. At the start of 2025 around 86% of UK premises were estimated to be within reach of such a gigabit-capable broadband network (here), which drops to 74% when only considering FTTP.

However, assuming the Government’s £5bn Project Gigabit programme delivers and commercial builds remain steady (most of today’s coverage has come from commercial deployments), then we could see gigabit coverage via fixed line networks reaching around 99% “nationwide” by 2030. Ofcom has predicted (here) that gigabit coverage will reach around 97-98% by May 2027 and that’s currently as far out as they’ll forecast.

Suffice to say that, within a few short years, the vast majority of this country will have gained the ability to choose from one or more gigabit-capable broadband networks. But such speeds are not an automatic upgrade for existing connections, thus you’d need to order the package from a supporting ISP in order to receive it. On top of that, there’s also a rapidly growing selection of multi-gigabit (2-10Gbps) providers, but that’s another topic.

Why Gigabit Prices Vary

The amount that ISPs charge for a 1Gbps package continues to vary quite a lot, which isn’t just down to competition. Different packages come attached to different features (e.g. static IP addresses, contract lengths, better routers etc. – assigning a value to such things is subject to personal preference) and some networks have also been deployed using different methodologies or technologies, all of which impacts cost.

For example, B4RN adopts the Community Benefit Society approach and operates a closed network, where the community sometimes helps to build and fund the infrastructure – this tends to result in a cheaper service (i.e. not profit orientated). By comparison, Openreach (BT) runs a commercial open access network, albeit one that has the baggage of heavily regulated copper infrastructure to balance – this can be more expensive.

Meanwhile, commercial providers that roll-out almost exclusively in rural areas also tend to be more expensive, as this reflects the higher cost of deployment. On the other hand, the new generation of commercial and urban-focused alternative networks (AltNet) are often very aggressive on price.

The Gigabit Comparison (Feb 2025 Data)

The table below is intended to examine how prices for consumer facing 1Gbps packages have changed over time, thus we’re continuing to use our original ISP sample from 2022 and haven’t added any new ones (the odd provider has also been removed due to consolidation). If you want to compare all of the available 1Gbps packages, and there are over 140 of those, then our ISP Listings page is the place to go.

Otherwise, this summary will generally only take a standalone (data-only) package from each operator, except in cases where the package is unavoidably bundled alongside a voice (phone) product. We’ll also reflect the post-contract pricing after any discounts (where possible), provided those discounts last the full length of the operator’s initial minimum term (shorter partial-term discounts are ignored as they’re harder to compare).

Finally, for providers with multiple underlying networks (each with different prices), we’ll only cover the two largest networks to reduce complexity and repetition. The list doesn’t cover upload speeds, but it’s worth noting that many providers will give you symmetric uploads, while those from Openreach and Virgin Media will often do c.100Mbps by default.

1Gbps UK Home Broadband Prices Over Time (Alphabetic)

The first thing to note above is that BT, CommunityFibre, EE, Vodafone and Virgin Media all have their monthly prices expressed as a range (e.g. for BT it’s £36.99 – £42.99), which reflects Ofcom’s recent change in pricing policy that allows us to see us to see the impact of mid-contract price hikes across the minimum term. Previously we couldn’t do this as those mid-contract hikes were linked to an unknown future figure of inflation.

In addition, we didn’t previously include Vodafone’s post-contract pricing because it was difficult to figure them out (vague policy), but the provider now states that your prices will rise by £5 per month after the end of your minimum term. As such, we’ve assumed they mean +£5 on what you were being charged after the most recent mid-contract price hike.

One other observation to make is that several providers have increased their minimum contract period since the last update. For example, Grain, Pine Media and Truespeed have gone from 12 to 24 months, while InternetTY and Swish Fibre have gone from 18 to 24 etc. On the flip side, Virgin Media went from 24 to 18 month terms. Longer contracts give ISPs more security and often make for cheaper packages, but also tie the customer down for longer.

Overall, the story is similar to 2023 in that many more ISPs reduced their prices than increased them in 2025, while a few others maintained the same pricing they had before. Only a smaller number increased their prices. However, it’s important to caveat that inflation (CPI and RPI) surged between 2022 and early 2024, which means that any ISP choosing to maintain the same price today as it had in 2023 will have technically been giving customers a real-terms price reduction. Openreach also introduced some big discounts in 2023 (Equinox 2) to help ISPs stay competitive with altnets, which may have offset some increases in other areas.

Finally, if we exclude the impact of mid-contract price hikes and post-contract pricing, then the average monthly price (at least for new customers) from the sample of providers listed above works out as £42.02. This compares with an average of £49.11 in 2023 (i.e. this is a decrease of £7.09 or -14.44%). Competitive pressures between networks is likely to continue to keep prices low for the next couple of years, but this may change as the market matures and economic pressures take their toll.

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

Network analyst firm Streetwave has conducted an anecdotal study of UK mobile coverage (4G, 5G etc.) and mobile broadband speeds along the South West Mainline – as operated by South Western Railway (SWR). This found that customers connected via mobile operator EE received the best coverage, while O2 were the weakest.

The South West Mainline is a 143 miles long (230km) major railway (train) line between London’s central Waterloo station and Weymouth (Dorset) on the central south coast of England. The line is a key commuter route and around 118 trains a day run between the cities according to Trainline.

Streetwave defines “Essential Coverage” as being reflective of locations where the network provides users with connectivity of above 1Mbps download speeds, 0.5Mbps upload, and below 100ms (milliseconds) of latency (i.e. covering or allowing only the most basic of use cases / needs).

Overall, EE delivered the highest levels of Essential Coverage across the line – with 68% of the railway covered and their “simulated passenger” being without a dependable internet connection for a total of 44 minutes during the trip. But others fared worse. The fact that EE came top is not so surprising when you consider that SWR has a strategic partnership with BT (who manage the EE network, which SWR’s onboard Wi-Fi uses).

Essential Coverage Scores on South West Mainline

1. EE – 68%
2. Vodafone – 55%
3. Three UK – 42%
4. O2 – 33%

Time Simulated Passenger Spent Without a Dependable Internet Connection

1. EE – 44 minutes
2. Vodafone – 61 minutes
3. Three UK – 79 minutes
4. O2 – 91 minutes

The survey was admittedly very anecdotal and really needed to be conducted several times, on different days and times of day, in order to produce a stronger level of data. But it does still provide a useful, if limited, snapshot of how mobile connectivity performs on the line (remember the onboard Wi-Fi service is usually also supplied via mobile capacity).

The results might also help to inform the current debate between mobile operators and the government. This is over whether public money should be diverted from the £1bn industry-led Shared Rural Network (SRN) to subsidise coverage improvements along Britain’s railway lines.

Finally, it’s worth noting that SWR are currently developing “superfast Wi-Fi technology” with FirstGroup, which will be installed between Earlsfield and Basingstoke. This trackside solution will be fully integrated with their existing onboard Wi-Fi service, which will benefit their mainline passengers.

Original article Total Telecom:Read More

News 

Colt Technology Services has agreed to sell eight of its European data centres to NorthC and a UK-based data centre firm, both backed by funds managed by investment giant DWS Group 

The facilities, located in Amsterdam, Berlin, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, and two sites in London, were part of Colt’s acquisition of Lumen EMEA in 2023. The deal is expected to complete later this year, subject to regulatory approvals. 

NorthC, a Netherlands-based data centre operator with a strong presence in the DACH region (Germany, Austria, Switzerland), will take on six sites across continental Europe. The two London data centres will be acquired by a separate UK entity also supported by DWS-managed funds. 

As part of the transaction, around 400 customers will transition to the new operators. However, Colt says the majority of these customers will remain on its network, as many use its connectivity services in parallel. 

Colt has said that the move aligns with its company strategy to “focus on its core business strategy”, concentrating on digital infrastructure and global network services, particularly as demand accelerates in AI, cloud and enterprise connectivity markets. 

The company will maintain a presence in the divested facilities, keeping network infrastructure and forming a strategic partnership with NorthC to ensure continued service delivery. 

“We’re pleased to have entered into this agreement to divest our data centres to NorthC and to the funds managed by DWS Group. The sale will enable us to focus on our strategic imperatives of driving growth, delivering exceptional customer experience and building a sustainable network for the future,” said Keri Gilder, CEO of Colt Technology Services in a press release. 

The deal also supports NorthC’s growth plans, expanding its regional data centre portfolio in key European metro areas. The company has been steadily growing its market presence through targeted acquisitions and localised service offerings. Colt’s global footprint spans more than 40 countries, with over 275 Points of Presence and ten subsea cable routes. It also co-manages AS3356, one of the most widely-peered networks globally. 

Join us at this year’s Connected Britain, 24-25 September in London. Get discounted tickets here! 

Also in the news:
No sign Baltic subsea cable damage was deliberate, say Swedish authorities
A Northern Ren-AI-ssance
Cordiant edges closer to completing of BT Ireland’s wholesale unit purchase  

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

The co-Founder & Chair of UK broadband ISP Fibrus, Conal Henry, has criticised network operator Openreach (BT Group) for the “pole tax” they claim is being levelled against them, which is said to be “twice the cost of paying our own staff, just to rent some poles and holes built by the British taxpayer“.

Just for some context. Openreach is required to provide access to their existing cable ducts and poles via the regulated Physical Infrastructure Access (PIA) product, which has been extremely successful. This enables rival networks (Altnets) to run their own fibre optic cables via the incumbent’s existing infrastructure – cutting down on build costs, disruption and speeding up rollouts of gigabit-capable full fibre (FTTP) broadband ISP networks.

Fibrus, much like many other network operators, have been harnessing PIA to support their roll-out across rural parts of both Northern Ireland and Cumbria in England. The operator’s network currently reaches over 400,000 premises and has connected 100,000 customers.

Openreach has described their PIA product as being “cheap as chips“, “really successful” (175 network builders are using their ducts and poles) and said it returns “very strong customer satisfaction scores“. But in a recent LinkedIn post, Fibrus’ Conal Henry appeared to strongly disagree with that viewpoint. The same issue is also touched on in a new BBC Look North episode, although at the time of writing this wasn’t available to view online.

Conal Henry said:

“BT Group’s “cheap as chips” pole tax on Fibrus is twice the cost of paying our own staff, just to rent some poles and holes built by the British taxpayer. Ofcom have allowed them to levy us with a charge which they don’t put on Openreach and which also includes the cost of the copper phone network we don’t use. These costs are 20 times higher for rural customers than for urban. Funnily enough, fibre penetration in rural areas is half what it is in cities.

Fibrus is calling on Ofcom and Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to deal with this unfair and illogical barrier to rural broadband now before it’s too late. If you agree, contact your elected representatives and tell them so and, whatever you do, don’t get your broadband from a phone company!”

The timing of Conal’s remarks are intended to help feed into the Ofcom’s current Telecoms Access Review 2026 (TAR), which will also be taking another look at PIA, although it currently seems unlikely to push for any truly radical changes. Similarly, other altnets have previously also called on the regulator to deliver fairness in pricing, to “ensure all users of PIA have a level playing field for access to infrastructure“ (here and here).

Conal’s concerns appear to be primarily centred around how altnets, “unlike Openreach“, must pay per-metre rental fees to access the same overground poles and underground ducts needed to install full-fibre broadband. “With rural properties spaced much further apart – typically 200m compared to just 10m in cities – the cost burden is significantly higher for rural expansion,” said Fibrus in a briefing document seen by ISPreview.

The fact that rural builds cost significantly more than urban ones is nothing new and it’s worth bearing in mind that Openreach will also suffer that impact when they build the infrastructure. But state-aid based deployments (e.g. Project Gigabit) can help to mitigate against those costs and naturally Openreach itself doesn’t need to pay the same rents, although they do have maintenance, repairs and other upkeep costs to consider. Fibrus also benefits from public funding in many of their rural builds.

The prices are ultimately set by Ofcom, not Openreach, and they’re supposed to be purposely set at a level which supports entry into the market by companies like Fibrus.

An Openreach spokesperson told ISPreview:

“This is a really successful product. It’s cheap as chips, achieves very strong customer satisfaction scores and, because of that, it’s been flying off the shelf.

175 network builders are using our ducts and poles to cut their network build costs by around half, according to Ofcom. That has encouraged intense competition across the market and helped more than 1.4m extra homes and businesses to be connected with Full Fibre. Also, crucially in rural areas, it’s avoided more than three million new poles being erected.

If anything, the prices are too low, given Altnets currently use around 20% of our duct and pole network yet only pay 4% towards its costs.”

In terms of that closing remark above, Openreach appears to be referencing how they previously reported duct and pole costs of £850m in FY24, although network builders only contributed £33m towards that (it’s unclear if that £850m figure includes costs from areas where no altnets are present/harnessing PIA). Rival networks also don’t pay upfront for network adjustments, and systems development costs aren’t included in their PIA prices.

As it stands, around 33% of Openreach’s duct and pole network is now either being used by rival networks or they’ve indicated plans to use it, which does help to show its popularity. On the flip side, Openreach argues that their rivals are often very reluctant to share their own infrastructure in the same way. But this is hardly surprising for smaller altnets, which carry a lot of risk and need to protect the value of their asset vs those with significant market power.

On the other hand, where altnets receive public investment to expand, then the rules often do oblige them to offer a degree of infrastructure access to rivals too. The catch there is that such unregulated products from altnets are often significantly more expensive than similar solutions via Openreach’s PIA (i.e. the terms involved often seem to be designed to discourage infrastructure sharing).

However, INCA’s Infrastructure Sharing Group (ISG) is separately working to produce a new sharing framework for alternative networks (here), which might help to solve some of the above issues. But this is more of an altnets-only kind of club and focuses on areas when Openreach’s own PIA solution is not available.

Otherwise, it seems like Ofcom will have the incredibly difficult job of trying to balance the many competing (vested) interests between different operators, and inevitably this will always result in some winners and losers.

Original article Total Telecom:Read More

News

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has accused regulators in Europe of harbouring anti-American biases against US tech firms

This article was originally written by Brad Randall, Editor of our sister publication Broadband Communities

It’s choosing time for Europe, at least according to comments from FCC Chairman Brendan Carr in a recent interview with the Financial Times.

Carr’s comments came as he accused countries in Europe of protectionism, saying that anti-American sentiment has played a factor in decisions made by European regulators.

“If Europe has its own satellite constellation then great, I think the more the better,” Carr said to the Financial Times, referring to low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite technology. “But more broadly, I think Europe is caught a little bit between the U.S. and China. And it’s sort of time for choosing.”

Carr’s comments also tried to downplay concerns about Starlink. In the past, Starlink has been criticized for lacking affordability versus the price tag for connections from fiber providers.

“If you’re concerned about Starlink, just wait for the CCP’s version, then you’ll be really worried,” Carr told the Financial Times, referring to the Chinese Communist Party.

He also reportedly urged Nokia and Ericsson to move more manufacturing operations to America.

Previously, Brian Hendricks, VP of Policy and Public Affairs for Nokia Americas, has told Broadband Communities that Nokia supports bringing manufacturing back to the United States.

However, he also called Trump’s tariff policies “extremely difficult to predict,” describing the current situation as “a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.”

Hendricks said the lack of predictability is causing “a real bottleneck” for those who are excited about the U.S. market’s potential and want to make investment choices but are concerned about recent events.

“So, it’s counterproductive. I think that’s what worries me,” he said.

To get content like this delivered to your inbox, subscribe to the Broadband Communities newsletter.

Learn more about Broadband Communities Summit 2025 in Houston.

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

UK ISP Plusnet has today introduced a bunch of new Easter discounts across their home broadband plans for new customers, which for example has cut the monthly price of their top 900Mbps Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) package to just £36.99 per month on a 24-month term (mid-contract price hikes apply). Plus there’s a £100 reward card thrown-in.

The internet provider’s fibre broadband packages are typically data-only plans (no home phone) that include unlimited usage, a new Hub Two wireless router (re-branded BT Smart Hub 2), UK based support, a 24-month minimum contract term, Plusnet SafeGuard and Protect – both powered by Norton – and free activation.

Take note that, on 31st March each year, the monthly plan price will increase by £3 for broadband and out of bundle charges will increase 5%. We’ve summarised what this means and the latest deals below.

Plusnet’s Easter 2025 Broadband Discounts

Full Fibre 145Mbps (30Mbps upload)
£50 Reward Card (pre-paid Mastercard)
Price: £26.99 per month

Price increases to £29.99pm on 1st April 2026 and £32.99pm on 1st April 2027

Full Fibre 300Mbps (50Mbps)
Price: £29.99

Price increases to £32.99pm on 1st April 2026 and £35.99pm on 1st April 2027

Full Fibre 500Mbps (75Mbps)
£75 Reward Card (pre-paid Mastercard)
Price: £31.99

Price increases to £34.99pm on 1st April 2026 and £37.99pm on 1st April 2027

Full Fibre 900Mbps (115Mbps)
£100 Reward Card (pre-paid Mastercard)
Price: £36.99

Price increases to £39.99pm on 1st April 2026 and £42.99pm on 1st April 2027

Take note that Plusnet also sell a 75Mbps FTTP and SOGEA (FTTC) based broadband tier that starts at £25.99 per month, which also comes with a £75 Reward Card.

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

Consumer magazine Which? has published the results from their latest UK mobile network satisfaction survey, which questioned 4,153 adults in January 2025 about their chosen operators. Overall, Smarty topped the table with a customer satisfaction score of 82%, while Three UK placed last on just 62%.

The survey itself typically questioned respondents about their experiences across several categories, including network reliability, overall value for money, customer service in general, the speed/ease of getting in touch, incentives, technical support, roaming value for money, download speeds (mobile broadband), communication frequency and quality.

In addition, the survey also ranked each provider by “Customer Score“, which is based on the respondent’s satisfaction and their likelihood to recommend the service. One catch with a survey of this limited size is that they needed at least 50 responses to include a survey result, and thus the sample sizes for some of these operators is considerably lower (less credible) than others. For example, O2 received 804 responses, while 1p Mobile got 54.

Several operators were also awarded the Which? ‘Recommended Provider‘ (WRP) status, which requires them to offer more than just great service to customers and they must also be able to offer prices that are lower than the market average. As for those with the ‘Great Value‘ status, this reflects networks that offer SIM-only deals that are significantly cheaper than the market average, for a good amount of data (mobile broadband).

As usual, most of the largest mobile network operators could all be found near the bottom of Which?’s table, while the top portion was dominated by smaller virtual (MVNO) operators that harness the same networks as the primary / biggest operators. The highest ranked of the primary operators was EE, which scored 71%.

Which? 2025 UK Mobile Awards Results (Customer Score)

RECOMMENDED PROVIDER, Great Value
Smarty 82%

RECOMMENDED PROVIDER
Voxi 81%

RECOMMENDED PROVIDER, Great Value
Talkmobile 80%

RECOMMENDED PROVIDER
Lebara 79%

Tesco Mobile 79%

RECOMMENDED PROVIDER
Giffgaff 77%

Great Value
1p Mobile 71%

Great Value
Asda 71%

EE 71%

Sky Mobile 71%

Great Value
iD Mobile 71%

Vodafone 69%

BT Mobile 68% (no longer available to new customers)

O2 68%

Lyca Mobile 64%

Three UK 63%

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

The latest analyst note from Swiss Bank UBS has maintained their long-running “sell” rating on the BT Group and predicted that Openreach could lose 800,000 broadband lines to rival networks in 2025 (up from 707k in 2024). The analyst warned that the operator needed to “deploy fibre faster” to stem the bleed and “accelerate [its] cost-cutting“, otherwise they claim it may face a downside risk to free cash flow in FY26.

“We reiterate our view that BT is seeing rising broadband infrastructure competition that is putting pressure on both Openreach and Consumer revenues and we think Openreach needs to deploy fibre faster,” said UBS. The bank continues to hold BT Group under a “sell” rating and points to a 12-month price target of 120p. The current market price is typically hovering around 165-166p (up from a low of c.105p at this time last year).

The BT Group is currently investing up to £15bn on their deployment of multi-gigabit capable Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) broadband technology, which already covers c. 18 million UK premises and is building at a rate of around 1 million premises per quarter. Openreach aims to reach 25 million premises by December 2026 and then holds an ambition to cover “up to” 30 million premises by 2030.

In terms of the positives. Openreach has been delivering good take-up of their FTTP network (c.35% – a figure that tends to be suppressed during rapid network builds) and Ofcom’s new Telecoms Access Market Review 2026 (TAR) didn’t propose any radical or hugely negative changes. Rival alternative networks are also under significant financial pressures, and many have had to slow or even pause their network builds. The BT Group also benefits from an established base of several hundred supporting ISPs and plenty of related brand familiarity.

On the flip side, some altnets are continuing to build at a rapid pace (e.g. Netomnia) and others (e.g. CityFibre) are looking to grow significant scale through consolidation. At the same time, those altnets that did slow their builds have instead switched strategies to focus on greater commercialisation, which means more effort going toward pulling customers away from Openreach and BT. The move by one of the market’s largest altnets, CityFibre, to sign-up Sky Broadband to their network is another problem for Openreach (here), although it remains to be seen how much of an impact this will have.

At a certain point, Openreach may look to respond by trying to push another round of wholesale price cuts on FTTP lines through Ofcom (i.e. Equinox 3). But BT’s past commitments mean that the earliest we might see this is spring 2026. In the meantime, Openreach may struggle to match some of the prices being charged by altnets, which will themselves no doubt complain that they’re in a vulnerable state and could be put under strain if the incumbent is given more flexibility on pricing (although consumers would benefit from a price war).

The suggestion that Openreach should deploy their FTTP build “faster” is another interesting one to consider, not least because their focus over the next few years will increasingly switch to rural areas and semi-rural towns / suburbs (most of the big urban locations are already very advanced in their coverage). The nature of such locations is that roll-outs tend to slow, and costs rise, as properties become harder to reach and sit further away from exchanges.

One other risk to consider is Virgin Media’s move to open up their newer XGS-PON full fibre (FTTP) network to wholesale in the very near future, which when combined with nexfibre’s coverage (technically a sibling by similar parents) could give Openreach a run for their money (particularly once the XGS-PON upgrades finish in 2028). But much of this will depend upon VM/nexfibre’s ability to offer attractive pricing and terms at wholesale, and we still don’t know exactly how they’ll be positioned.

One final point to make is that analysts are constantly changing their opinions, which tend to vary quite a bit. For example, BNP Paribas upgraded BT to “neutral” last week, Barclays rated them “underweight” earlier in March, Arete upgraded them to “buy” in Feb, Citi downgraded and Goldman recommended “buy” in January etc.

The reality today is that we’re rapidly moving past the mid-way point of the national FTTP roll-out, and the wider market is in a state of some flux. Time will tell how it all pans out.

Original article Total Telecom:Read More

News

Multiple cables in the Baltic Sea were severed in November, with authorities initially suspecting deliberate sabotage

Today, Swedish authorities have released the initial results of their investigation into the Baltic submarine cable cuts, saying that there is no evidence of foul play.

“It cannot be determined with certainty whether a Chinese ship intentionally damaged data cables in the Baltic Sea,” concluded the government authority in a statement.

However, a separate probe into the cuts is still ongoing, with deliberate damage by bad actors not being ruled out.

“A lot of [the damage to the cables] is consistent with an accident,” said the head of the investigating authority, Jonas Bäckstrand. “But it is clear that if you want to do something deliberately, you also do it in a way that will avoid detection as much as possible.”

The pair of submarine cables in the Baltic Sea were fully severed in November last year, with the surrounding nations quick to raise the question of potential sabotage.

Following the initial phases of investigation, it was discovered that the Chinese bulk carrier ship Yi Peng 3 was in the area at the time the cable damage occurred. The ship has since been under investigation for dragging its anchor across cables, though whether this was done deliberately or accidentally is unclear.

The two affected cables were the BCS East-West Interlink cable, which connects Gotland, Sweden, and Lithuania, and the C-lion-1 cable between Helsinki, Finland, and Rostock, Germany.

The latter is the only direct subsea cable link between Finland and mainland Europe.

At the time, the German and Finnish governments released a joint statement saying, “We are deeply concerned about the severed undersea cable connecting Finland and Germany in the Baltic Sea. The fact that such an incident immediately raises suspicions of intentional damage speaks volumes about the volatility of our times.”

“We take all reports of possible damage to infrastructure in the Baltic Sea very seriously. As I said earlier, they must be seen against the background of the serious security situation that prevails”, wrote Finnish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson on X in February.

Join us at next year’s Submarine Networks EMEA in London, 27-28 May in London. Get tickets here!

Also in the news:
NOW Telecom’s mobile licence revoked after ‘grossly deficient’ infra rollout
Nokia, Telia, and Finnish military demo 5G network slicing across borders
Anatel approves expansion of Starlink satellite operations in Brazil