[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next date => thread => ]
On 30/09/10 20:57, stinga@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 30/09/10 16:01:02, Gordon Henderson wrote:It's £132 million you numptys...Ha!, they have changed it. It didn't have the 'm' on it originally. They have not fixed this one though... In Erbistock, near Wrexham, BT told villagers it would cost them £550,000 to get a broadband connection for 80 houses. Rival Rutland Telecom then quoted £50,000, prompting BT to reassess costs and come back with a figure of £100.
That sounds about the same as the quote I got from Rutland Telecom for Newton Abbot. The issue there was the cabinet had something like 40 odd subscribers so it wasn't cost effective (not unless each subscriber was prepared to pay, or if any big businesses were prepared to chip in together). Didn't help that Virgin had cabled that particular area up so anyone who wanted fast broadband would have probably gone to Virgin.
What's that, £1.25 for each house?
Yep, seems a bit too cheap to me. At least Rutland's quote came out at just over £600 per house (which I'm guessing that maybe the residents would probably be willing to pay if they couldn't get any broadband at all).
Rob -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq