Fibre X vs Fibre UFB

Forums › One NZ (including Farmside) › Fibre X vs Fibre UFB

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#217741 10-Jul-2017 18:54

Currently pricing various ISPs as my current 12 month contract is coming up with my current ISP. I am already on a UFB fibre 100/20 plan. I noticed with Vodafone pricing, that it says I would need to sign up to a Fibre X plan, which is about $90 per month. I am guessing this is using the old Saturn fibre cable. Although it doesn't give me the option to use UFB, it looks like this would be an extra $10 per month. If I did go for the Fibre X option, does this mean that Vodafone would need to dig up my garden to install the Fibre X line? I am guessing they won't be able to hook it up to the UFB line. Just seems really backwards and inefficient, but potentially means I get it cheaper and faster than their UFB option.

1 | 2

4431 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1306
Inactive user

#1819053 10-Jul-2017 18:56

I doubt they'd hook you up to HFC if you have fibre already.

darylblake

1172 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 410

Trusted

#1819054 10-Jul-2017 18:58

Fibre X is a different product to UFB. Its a different network, owned and operated by Vodafone.

I would continue to use a UFB product if possible.

antoniosk

2382 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 742

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1819069 10-Jul-2017 19:12

mattwnz:
Currently pricing various ISPs as my current 12 month contract is coming up with my current ISP. I am already on a UFB fibre 100/20 plan. I noticed with Vodafone pricing, that it says I would need to sign up to a Fibre X plan, which is about $90 per month. I am guessing this is using the old Saturn fibre cable. Although it doesn't give me the option to use UFB, it looks like this would be an extra $10 per month. If I did go for the Fibre X option, does this mean that Vodafone would need to dig up my garden to install the Fibre X line? I am guessing they won't be able to hook it up to the UFB line. Just seems really backwards and inefficient, but potentially means I get it cheaper and faster than their UFB option.

The network is installled, so the marginal costs of being competitive on fibre are good.

Why not call and see what they will do?

The default is to use cable, but I doubt they will spend $750 on a roll and connect.

________

Antoniosk

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1819072 10-Jul-2017 19:21

darylblake:

Fibre X is a different product to UFB. Its a different network, owned and operated by Vodafone.

I would continue to use a UFB product if possible.

I would but

(a) it doesn't give me the option in their website, only Fibre X

(b) Fibre X is 200Mbps + base, where their UFB one is 100Mbps

Otherwise they would need to offer me the same benefits as Fibre X, with my UFB connection. Otherwise my only option is to just use another ISP, as I don't want them ripping up my garden when I already have UFB, as that would just be stupid.

blakamin

4431 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1306
Inactive user

#1819082 10-Jul-2017 19:35

I'd also read about congestion issues on FibreX

Sideface

9649 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15596

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1819130 10-Jul-2017 19:49

mattwnz:

darylblake:

Fibre X is a different product to UFB. Its a different network, owned and operated by Vodafone.

I would continue to use a UFB product if possible.

I would but

(a) it doesn't give me the option in their website, only Fibre X

(b) Fibre X is 200Mbps + base, where their UFB one is 100Mbps

(c) Fibre X 200Mbps is $10 cheaper than what they charge for UFB 100Mbps

Otherwise they would need to offer me the same benefits as Fibre X, with my UFB connection. Otherwise my only option is to just use another ISP, as I don't want them ripping up my garden when I already have UFB.

a) Vodafone don't/won't offer you a UFB option if you are in a "cable" area, because they make a higher profit from the cable network, which they own.

Just get UFB fibre from another provider.

b) & c)

I have the misfortune to be on "FibreX" 200/20 Mbps cable.

I have used "real fibre" (UFB) in the past at a previous address, but UFB will not be available at my current Wellington address until late 2019.

In my experience UFB is vastly superior to cable in all respects, and is well worth the slight extra cost.

The "200Mbps" of cable is actually less than 100Mbps - typically 50Mbps or (much) less.

With "FibreX" cable you get wonderful-looking speed tests, but poor real-world performance.

AVOID FibreX if you have a "real" fibre option. It's not worth the small saving.

I will change back to UFB at the earliest opportunity - I don't care what it costs.

Sideface

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

Linux

12173 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8469

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1819142 10-Jul-2017 19:57

Yes you can make a request thru the VodafoneNZ retention team to be connected to Fibre UFB in a Cable HFC area

Linux

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#1819166 10-Jul-2017 20:43

blakamin:

I'd also read about congestion issues on FibreX

And it you're into gaming then I'd check what the current ping is on HFC and it you want to go there.

You also need to remember that 200 is PIR not CIR and your constant throughput might not be good depending on how many people on the node in your area.

Given the amount of marketing they've been doing recently, I'd think they'll have been picking up a few more customers again.

Oh, and before anyone just comes and accuses me of being a 'hater'... I built a wireless network over two suburbs just to avoid that network because it was just so crap. So far I've invested over $50k just to keep away from it... so ya, take my comments with what ever gran of salt you choose.... I'm not a fan.

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

blakamin

4431 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1306
Inactive user

#1819172 10-Jul-2017 20:55

I only mention it because my ex has it and has issues which slow skype and hangout calls with my kids.

I'm personally not fussed if you go fibre X... Just saying I wouldn't.

quickymart

14940 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 13953

ID Verified

#1819174 10-Jul-2017 20:57

Is fibre in the future for you Don? Or are you out of coverage for it?

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#1819224 10-Jul-2017 22:02

quickymart:

Is fibre in the future for you Don? Or are you out of coverage for it?

I have 12 nice cores of fibre at that site now thanks... and three suburbs covered by a nice little wireless network ;)

...I did promise the nice lady I asked for service, 7 years ago that I'd sort out my local community :)

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

DP

7 posts

Wannabe Geek
+1 received by user: 1

#1821780 13-Jul-2017 12:36

Stay on UFB, dose there X network need a new router? definitely look for another provider - VF NZ retention team are lying, ripe off pricks.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41030

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3115458 14-Aug-2023 08:21

Reviving this old thread because news from ComCom are relevant, since both of these are shown in this thread:

Fibre X was not fibre
Vodafone gave the impression that was the only option for customers in certain areas

ComCom action delivers $3.675 million ‘sting’ to One NZ for Kiwi consumers

The Commerce Commission says a record $3.675 million fine imposed on One NZ (formerly Vodafone NZ) for misleading consumers in the marketing of its FibreX broadband service is a significant win for Kiwi consumers.

Commission Chair, John Small, says the penalty is the highest ever handed down by a court under the Fair Trading Act – reflecting the seriousness of the company’s conduct between 2016 and 2018 – and will serve as a strong deterrent to other large businesses.

“This judgment against One NZ is a significant win for Kiwi consumers – because every New Zealander should be able to trust what businesses are saying in their marketing and promotion of their services.

“The Fair Trading Act requires claims to be truthful and accurate in order to give you the information you need to make an informed purchasing decision.

“In this case, One NZ’s conduct was misleading and, in addition to the consumer harm, it distorted competition for the supply of broadband services in New Zealand,” Dr Small says.

In an appeal judgment released by the High Court on Friday (11 August 2023), Justice Moore allowed the Commission’s appeal against the original fine imposed by the District Court and said a greater uplift was required in order “to ensure the penalty ‘stings’ from [One NZ’s] perspective” and serves as a deterrent – particularly given [One NZ’s] history of non-compliance with the Fair Trading Act. The High Court also dismissed One NZ’s appeal against its conviction on nine of the original charges.

One NZ was found guilty by the District Court in 2021 for misleading consumers into believing its FibreX service was fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) broadband, when it was not. It was also found guilty of falsely suggesting to consumers that FibreX was the only available broadband service at their address, which was not true.

One NZ was fined $2.25 million by the District Court in April last year, which the Commission appealed, arguing that the sentence was ‘manifestly inadequate’ and did not appropriately reflect the seriousness of the offending, and the size and financial resources of the business.

The promotion of FibreX denied consumers the ability to make an informed choice about the most appropriate broadband option for their needs.

“By misleading consumers into believing FibreX was fibre-to-the-home, One NZ distorted competition by giving itself an unfair advantage over its competitors who were selling true ‘fibre’, including local fibre companies and other retailers,” Dr Small says.

One NZ’s conduct coincided with Government investment of more than $1.5 billion in the roll-out of UFB (Ultra-fast Broadband). This investment had a focus on stimulating consumer uptake of fibre-to-the-home broadband services. Around 250,000 households in Wellington, Kapiti and Christchurch were targeted by the FibreX campaign.

The appeal judgment can be read on the High Court website here.

Background
Vodafone NZ (renamed One NZ) was sentenced in the Auckland District Court on 14 April 2022 on 18 representative charges under section 11 of the Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) relating to conduct in Wellington, Kapiti and Christchurch, where its “FibreX” branded service was offered, between 26 October 2016 and 28 March 2018.

The 18 charges comprised:

• Nine charges relating to Vodafone’s representations on its website about the availability of fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) broadband services, to which Vodafone pleaded guilty on 16 November 2018; and
• Nine further charges arising from Vodafone’s branding and advertising of its Hybrid Fibre-coaxial (HFC) broadband service, of which Vodafone was found guilty in the Auckland District Court in April 2021 after a 14-day trial.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

Wombat1

586 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 409
Inactive user

#3115462 14-Aug-2023 08:37

Now they need to go after the other providers that advertise hyper fibre as having lower latency to regular fibre.

SirHumphreyAppleby

2938 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1860

#3115469 14-Aug-2023 08:53

I was surprised to see this thread revived, given this was known about so long ago.

What is disappointing is how long the Commerce Commission and legal system are taking to get these prosecutions processed. This, and another recent case involving Mercury, have both taken 6+ years. If the goal is to send a message that this sort of activity is illegal and discourage it, this process needs to happen more quickly.

I have personally filed a complaint with the CC relating to misleading activity (and outright contract breaches). Maybe in five to six years, I'll see a random press release validating my complaint.

1 | 2