FTTP From BT & Rural House Prices

samwardill

I'm trying to persuade my parents to get BT Full Fibre because I think it will increase their house price. They live in an isolated house in Staffordshire about 3 miles from the nearest town but BT offer Full Fibre up to 1GBps. The price @ £40 per month with 24 month contract is about twice what they pay now (with Plusnet) to get 60MBps. That £40 / month is only for 150MBps but crucially it means that BT would pay to install a fibre to the home so the 1GBps would then be easy. Is there any evidence to show that this is worth it? 

Does anyone know whether any other ISPs are likely to start offering full fibre to consumers in these area with Openreach Full Fibre availability any time soon?

unforeseen

Are they actually thinking of selling?
Whether it is installed or not will not affect the sale price of the house. Its the availability that is the crucial point.
Remember the price quoted is for broadband only, telephone costs will be additional if a landline is still wanted/needed. 

Zellah

1) Whether they actually have a live FTTP service makes zero difference, its the availability to order which is the important bit.
2) BT aren't the only provider offering FTTP over the Openreach network, there are plenty of others: TalkTalk, Sky, Zen, AAISP, IDNet etc just to name a few. However BT will be amongst the cheapest, some cracking offers from BT here:
https://www.bt.com/campaign/full-fibre-240

ARH_2

Having access to (installed or not irrelevant) 1GB vs. 60MB isn't going to affect a house's value significantly. 

Most people's thought process is 'can I stream Netflix?' If a property had access to less than 5-10MBps that'd start to turn some people off. The advantage of additional speed beyond that point is really a deminishing return from the point of view of the average consumer. Sure 1GBps is 17 faster than what they have now, but the difference it'll actually make to their or someone else's life is minimal.

matelodave

As ARH says, as they've got a decent 60mbit/s internet speed then there's no real benefit in being able to get twice or even ten times that for most people. 

Any supplier of a FTTP would arrange to get the fibre installed and may or may not charge a fee when the time comes so there's no advantage in paying another £240 a year for two years or more just in case they want to flog their house at some time in the future. They already have the benefit of it being available to them, even if it's not actually connected to their house at the moment.

We had FTTP installed a couple of year ago and I now get 76mbit's instead of an unreliable 2mbit's ADSL connection. Many other houses upgraded because the existing ADSL was so poor but there are only a couple who have taken advantage of the higher 150 or 300 speeds (they run their own businesses). There's been no real evidence of property values increasing as a result although I guess they might have become a bit easier to sell. There are a myriad of other factors in setting house prices and although a decent broadband connection might be one of them it probably doesn't really add a great deal to the property value although a poor connection will probably detract from it

JJ_Egan

As above FTTP  initially 300 MB  . No price rises in FTTP area over non FTTP .

In fact only 30 % of my road have taken up FTTP so far .

Speed of no use and as part of package downgraded to 80/20 plenty for me .

Chino

If your parents want to increase the selling price of their house they might be better off putting the extra money you're proposing they spend on FTTP provisioning towards getting a gardener in once a week to keep their garden tidy.

Mickey666

ARH_2 said:

Having access to (installed or not irrelevant) 1GB vs. 60MB isn't going to affect a house's value significantly. 

Most people's thought process is 'can I stream Netflix?' If a property had access to less than 5-10MBps that'd start to turn some people off. The advantage of additional speed beyond that point is really a deminishing return from the point of view of the average consumer. Sure 1GBps is 17 faster than what they have now, but the difference it'll actually make to their or someone else's life is minimal.

Agreed.  It’s a bit like saying a car that can do 120mph is ‘better’ than one that can only do 100mph.  There’s is no difference to the vast majority of drivers, only a few that actually use the extra speed on track days and the like.  

Anyone who genuinely need very high speeds will know why.  Anyone who questions whether they need very high speeds almost certainly doesn’t.