Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

Broadband and media giant Sky UK (Comcast) has this morning confirmed that they’ve “agreed terms” to acquire ITV’s broadcasting business, specifically the company’s Media and Entertainment divisions, which include both their free-to-air TV channels and the ITV X video streaming service for a total consideration of up to £1.6bn (£1.2bn of which is cash).

The deal, which was first rumour last year, reflects the fact that the traditional TV broadcasting business is currently coming under immense pressure from both a rise in the use of video streaming services (Netflix, Prime [Amazon], YouTube, Disney+ etc.) and the future switch-off of digital terrestrial TV services – expected to occur in 2034 or 2044 (licences that support DTTV are already due to expire in 2034) – in favour of streaming TV channels over broadband.

Suffice to say that consolidation and innovation like this may help to balance against that, although such a sale will see the pair controlling around 70% of the UK’s TV advertising market. Such a situation might normally raise a few regulatory red flags, but the rise in competition from streaming services does tend to change that dynamic and ITV did previously forecast that its ad revenues would be 9% lower in the last quarter of 2025 (i.e. Sky’s deal might now be viewed as more of a rescue).

Otherwise, following completion, ITV channels and ITVX will remain free-to-air, with their public service broadcasting commitments continuing to be met, while Sky will continue to be the home of entertainment, sport, and connectivity (mobile and broadband etc.).

The new agreement will also see Sky enter into a £2.1bn content supply agreement over 5 years with ITV Studios upon completion of the deal (ITV Studios itself is not part of Sky’s acquisition). Programming acquired under the agreement will not count towards ITV independent production quotas, helping to ensure continued opportunities for independent producers across the UK.

Dana Strong (CBE), Sky Group CEO, said:

“This is a defining moment for British media and an opportunity to build a stronger future for two of the UK’s most loved and trusted brands. We have huge respect for the transformation the ITV team has delivered, particularly its successful move into streaming through ITVX, which has brought fantastic British content to millions of viewers across the UK.

Bringing Sky and ITV Media & Entertainment together combines the very best of free-to-air television, pay TV and streaming, ensuring viewers across the UK continue to enjoy outstanding British programming in a rapidly changing world.

ITV will remain a public service broadcaster at the heart of British life, and we’re excited about the future we can build together.”

Carolyn McCall (DBE), CEO of ITV plc, said:

“ITV has successfully evolved in a rapidly changing media landscape – launching, and scaling, ITVX and developing ITV Studios into a major force in the global content market. This transaction builds on that momentum to deliver clear, tangible value for shareholders.

At the same time, through the commitments made by Sky, the combined ITV M&E / Sky business will continue to deliver everything about ITV that our viewers and advertisers love and value and our people are hugely proud of – making programmes that reflect and shape society, bringing people together for shared experiences and having the quality, diversity and plurality that are the hallmarks of our contribution to the UK’s creative industries. In addition, all of ITV’s PSB commitments, including regional and national news, are safeguarded under the terms of the Channel 3 Licences until 2034, which Sky is acquiring as part of the Transaction.

I am also confident that Sky will be a strong and responsible custodian of ITV M&E, building on its heritage while investing in its future and safeguarding the qualities that make ITV so valued by viewers, advertisers and the UK’s creative industries.”

Both sides clearly hope that the combined business will have the resources and technology capabilities to compete more effectively in today’s modern streaming focused market, while also delivering approximately £200m in annual cost synergies (on a run-rate basis) by the end of the third year after closing; most of that will come from efficiencies in marketing, technology platforms and non-UK content. But first they’ll need to get all of this past the regulators.

The news follows shortly after Sky’s parent, Comcast, announced its intention to separate their media and technology businesses into public companies through a “tax-free spin-off” of NBCUniversal and Sky (here). The move will create two companies – Comcast and NBCUniversal (existing Comcast shareholders will own shares in both companies).

NBCUniversal will become a global media and entertainment company, consisting of Universal’s film and television studios, NBC and Telemundo networks, Peacock, Bravo and Sky’s UK and European media business (inc. Sky Broadband and Sky Mobile etc.).

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

The City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (CBMDC) in West Yorkshire has told UK broadband and phone operator Openreach (BT) to remove their external wall boxes (CSP) from homes within the World Heritage Site area of the city, such as those around the Saltaire UNESCO area and possibly others. Such boxes are usually installed as part of copper and fibre deployments.

According to locals in the affected area (special credit to ISPreview readers Danny and Chris for the tip), residents recently began reporting that men dressed as Openreach engineers had been dropping letters into homes where they’d previously installed the wall boxes (these are better known as ‘Customer Service Points‘ – CSP).

The letters state that Bradford City Council recently advised Openreach that, during local customer installations of their new copper and full fibre (FTTP) broadband services, the operator had installed a CSP “on the front elevation of your property … As you may be aware, Saltaire is a designated World Heritage Site, and properties within this area are classified as listed buildings. Bradford City Council have asked, given this is a heritage site, that the apparatus [pictured above] needs to be removed from the outside of the building.”

The notice goes on to state that Openreach would then install a “smaller” and more “discrete internal box” within impacted homes. A copy of the letter can be found below (article continues below) and promptly caused some residents to question whether it was legitimate or not via local Facebook groups.

Picture of Openreach’s Letter to Local Homes

A spokesperson for Openreach told ISPreview:

“The letter is genuine, we’re dropping all properties with an external CSP within the World Heritage Site area with a view to changing the install, so it has a small internal CSP. The plan is to give them all a letter and follow up in person to try and arrange appointments.”

The good news is that the perhaps mildly embarrassing episode will be corrected free of charge by the operator, although arranging all that work to take place across local homes is naturally a bit of a choir and one that may put some unexpected short-term pressures on local engineering resources.

Otherwise, it’s not the first time that we’ve seen network operators being asked to shift a piece of their infrastructure in protected areas, although only very rarely have we ever seen this take place across multiple homes at the same time (it normally occurs due to singular incidents).

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

The UK Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (UKWISPA), which has been the official trade body for wireless broadband ISPs, Wi-Fi hotspot providers and associated networks for the past 11 years, has announced that it is being “wound-up” and its operations transferred to an as yet unnamed “new entity“.

However, the Founder and Chairman of UKWISPA, David Burns, has previously indicated that the “international success of Wireless Coverage and WISDM” (the latter is a mapping system for wireless broadband networks) meant that he could not “commit the amount of time and energy needed to help drive forward” the UK organisation.

The Chairman had initially proposed an alternative solution, which would have seen a “refreshed team” take UKWISPA forward and delivered “closer collaboration” with the Independent Networks Co-operative Association (INCA). But David added that “certain members” recently “rejected” that proposal and have subsequently proposed to “create a new organisation to replace UKWISPA as we know it“, which is the idea that will now be taken forward.

In short, UKWISPA is being “wound-up” in favour of the new entity, which we currently know nothing about. The full statement can be read below.

Statement from UKWISPA’s Chairman to Members

The UK Wireless Internet Services Providers Association was formed eleven years ago, and we have had an amazing journey together! Together, we have seen the industry grow and have elevated our status as an important piece of the UK broadband landscape.

However, as outlined in October last year, and reaffirmed in our Spring Members Meeting in London, the international success of Wireless Coverage and WISDM means that I cannot commit the amount of time and energy needed to help drive forward UKWISPA.

As previously set out, I proposed an orderly transition to a refreshed team to take UKWISPA forward, which also included closer collaboration with INCA. It remains my firm belief that it is in the best interests of the FWA and wider independent broadband provider sector to actively encourage investment in more high-quality gigabit blended fibre and wireless networks. This was a key element of my proposals put to members this year, and I was committed to investing my time and money towards that goal until the Autumn Members Meeting.

However, despite the support from Members in the consultation survey in May 2026, at the last Member Consultation call on 4 th June 2026, it became clear that certain members of the UKWISPA Advisory Board rejected my proposals to evolve the current UKWISPA and have subsequently proposed to create a new organisation to replace UKWISPA as we know it.

It is therefore with a very heavy heart that I am announcing that we are accepting this proposal and The UK Wireless Internet Services Providers Association will be wound-up and we will transfer operations to the new entity. All trading and operations have therefore now ceased pending handover to the new entity.

The new organisation has a very similar mission to support the interests of the UK FWA market, and they would like to invite you to transfer your membership to them.

Due to GDPR constraints, we cannot simply give the new organisation personal contact details, but we are providing details about your organisation’s membership status and renewal dates, and we do encourage you to opt-in to membership.

Please can you send an email to ukwispa@ukwispa.org confirming that you are happy to be contacted about membership.

I’m sure that the team behind new UKWISPA will be familiar to you already and I know they will be delighted to work with you, and we wish them every success in so doing, namely; Ian Bushrod, Sharon McDermott, Tim Porter, Steve Temple, Trevor Cook, Jenny Gillwald, Oli Stockman, Hal Ponton and George Taylor.

Finally, I would like to thank you for being with me on this journey for the past eleven- years. We have seen tremendous change in the industry and we have had both happy times, and sadness where members have passed.

It has been my privilege to work with you and Dilya and I are immensely proud of the organisation we have built.

We wish you every success in the future and hope our paths cross again.

Kindest regards

David Burns

Founder – UKWISPA

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

Sky has confirmed that their sibling NOW (NOW TV) video streaming platform and broadband service will soon stop working on several older TV set-top-boxes, as well as various older Apple iOS based Smartphones and tablets. The changes will start to be felt from mid-July 2026 onwards.

Nothing lasts forever and over time it’s fairly common for older TV devices to eventually lose support. This is usually partly because the hardware can no longer keep up as software and codecs evolve, as well as being due to the wider economic or security considerations of putting development time into kit that hasn’t been sold for years etc.

Due to this it’s been revealed that, from 3rd August 2026, several NOW TV and Roku boxes (NOW’s older set-top-boxes were all based off Roku’s kit) will no longer work with the Roku app (i.e. the boxes and other apps may still work, but NOW’s app won’t). The devices affected include the NOW TV Smart Box (4500SK), Roku Streaming Stick 3500X and Roku box models 2700X, 2710X and 2720X.

The above change largely reflects Roku’s own decision to end support for its older devices, although customers who have the NOW TV Black Box (model 4200SK) will continue to be supported. But it’s not only older set-top-boxes that are about to lose NOW App support.

According to CordBusters, several older iOS-based devices, including anything that only supports iOS 15 or older (i.e. Apple iPhones older than the iPhone 7, as well as the iPad Air 2 and iPad mini 4 or older), will similarly find that the NOW App stops working for them from mid-July 2026. Apple dropped support for this hardware when it released iOS 16 and the NOW App will soon need at least iOS 16 to run.

Original article Total Telecom:Read More

Contributed Article

By Ferris Adi, Chief Information Security Officer, Trans Americas Fiber System

Subsea cables have long been viewed as physical infrastructure, fiber on the ocean floor, landing stations, and cable ships. That view is no longer sufficient. Today’s subsea systems are defined less by steel and fiber, and more by the digital operating ecosystem that surrounds them. As these environments become more automated, remotely managed, and vendor-integrated, they are quietly transforming into critical cyber systems, and expanding the attack surface in ways many organizations have yet to fully recognize.

The risk has shifted, but the narrative hasn’t

Public discussion still focuses on physical risks: anchor dragging, fishing activity, and geopolitical disruption. These threats remain real and visible.

But the more immediate risk is less visible, and more scalable: What happens if the systems used to operate, monitor, or restore subsea infrastructure are compromised? In modern environments, the cable itself is no longer the most vulnerable point. The management plane is.

From passive asset to digital ecosystem

A subsea system is no longer a single asset. It is an interconnected service model that includes:

• Network operations platforms and control systems
• Vendor access and remote support pathways
• Identity, privileged access, and monitoring infrastructure
• Cloud-connected services and customer platforms
• Restoration, assurance, and operational workflows

This ecosystem drives performance, but it also defines the attack surface. A compromise in any one of these layers can escalate quickly from a technical issue into an operational, regulatory, or customer-impacting event.

The hidden critical layer: The management plane

The most important systems in subsea cybersecurity are often the least visible to executives. The management plane governs how infrastructure is configured, accessed, monitored, and restored. If compromised, it provides attackers not just with disruption capability, but with the ability to operate the network itself.

This risk is amplified in environments with:

• Heavy reliance on vendor support
• Weak identity controls or shared credentials
• Limited segmentation between IT, OT, and operational systems
• Unmonitored or poorly governed remote access

If the management plane is not secured, resilience is largely theoretical.

Why geographic diversity is not enough

The subsea industry has historically defined resilience through route and bare metal servers in a 1+1 config for the NMS, multiple paths, landings, and restoration options. That assumption no longer holds in a cyber context. Cyber threats are not constrained by geography. A globally distributed network can still fail in a correlated way if it shares:

• Identity vulnerabilities
• Common vendor access models
• Centralized management dependencies
• Untested recovery processes

Geographic diversity reduces physical risk. It does not address systemic cyber risk. True resilience requires design diversity, access control, and operational discipline.

The greenfield advantage, and responsibility

New subsea programs have a rare opportunity: the ability to build security before operations begin. This is the point where decisions are most impactful—and least expensive to implement. Organizations that succeed treat cybersecurity as a core design function, embedding it into:

• Architecture: Segmentation, controlled access pathways, separation of operational and corporate environments
• Supplier models: Clearly defined access controls, accountability, and oversight
• Operational readiness: Logging, monitoring, and validated recovery capabilities
• Emergency access: Structured, time-bound, and auditable “break-glass” processes

If these controls are not built early, they become significantly harder, and often incomplete, once operations are underway.

Supplier risk is now an operational risk

Subsea infrastructure depends on specialized suppliers. That dependency is unavoidable. What must change is how it is governed. Supplier assurance can no longer sit within procurement processes alone. It must be operationalized daily, through:

• Controlled and monitored remote access
• Session visibility and auditability
• Defined roles in incident response and recovery
• Clear ownership and accountability

If a supplier is critical to restoring service, they must be part of the resilience model before an incident, not during it.

Resilience is defined under pressure

The true test of subsea cybersecurity is not policy; it is behavior during disruption.

Marine repair events illustrate this clearly. Under pressure:

• Access controls are often relaxed
• External actors are introduced
• Decisions are accelerated
• Standard processes are bypassed

These conditions increase cyber risk at precisely the moment when operational dependency is highest.

Leading operators recognize that repair windows are also cyber events, and plan accordingly, with predefined access controls, approval mechanisms, and validation processes.  Resilience is not theoretical. It is controlled execution under stress.

From compliance to operational readiness

Cybersecurity frameworks provide structure but they do not guarantee resilience.

Resilient organizations are defined by their ability to:

• Detect meaningful anomalies across identity, access, and management systems
• Make informed decisions quickly under pressure
• Coordinate effectively across internal teams and suppliers
• Restore services with confidence, and evidence

The shift required is from control presence to operational confidence.

The board-level question that matters

Executives do not need detailed technical expertise, but they do need clarity. The most important question is not whether controls exist, but whether they work when needed.

“If a critical management system or supplier access path were compromised today, how quickly would we know, and how confidently could we restore service?”

This question forces alignment across governance, technology, operations, and supplier management. It also exposes the difference between compliance and resilience.

The next decade will raise the stakes

Subsea infrastructure is becoming increasingly strategic and increasingly contested.

It underpins:

• Cloud and hyperscale platforms
• Financial and digital economies
• Government communications and national security
• AI-driven workloads and global data exchange

At the same time, advances in AI, automation, and supply chain complexity will accelerate both attacker capability and operational dependency.

Technology alone will not determine the outcome. The differentiator will be governance and operational discipline.

Redefining the asset

The future of subsea cybersecurity will not be secured by protecting the cable alone. It will be secured by protecting the operating model around it, identity, access, vendors, monitoring systems, and recovery processes. Subsea infrastructure has always connected continents. But in a digital-first world, the real challenge is no longer connectivity.

It is trust. And trust, in this context, is built on one thing: Proven resilience before it is needed.

The submarine cable industry is evolving rapidly. Join the industry in discussion at Submarine Networks EMEA 2027

The post The new cyber frontline beneath the sea: Why subsea resilience must be built from day one appeared first on Total Telecom.

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

Broadband and Ethernet customers across northern parts of Liverpool (Merseyside) – primarily the L31 (Maghull) and surrounding areas – in England are today suffering connectivity problems after a third-party contractor, which may have been working for the waterboard, dug through a large underground cable right next to the local BT Maghull exchange.

The situation appears to have started yesterday and is currently still ongoing. ISPreview contacted Openreach about the situation earlier this morning, but we have so far received no response. However, details sent to impacted communications providers do confirm a few things, such as that third-party contractors working for a utility company on a sewer excavation “damaged multiple fibre cables” near the exchange.

The resultant outage has hit both copper and fibre optic based broadband connections, as well as high-capacity Ethernet (leased line) services – the latter includes some circuits supporting Critical National Infrastructure (CNI). In total around 3,000 end customers are known to be impacted, but this is expected to rise as not everybody has reported in yet.

Engineers currently appear to be swarming the area, although complex repairs like this, which involve damage across “multiple ducts” and an “unstable” excavation side (that will have to be made safe first), will take a lot of time. Some cables also “cannot be pulled through” and will need more extensive repair.

As a result of this it’s hard to know precisely when the situation will be fully resolved and a solid fix time (estimate) may not emerge until the weekend.

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

Astronomy is under threat like never before. A significant new study, which was conducted by astronomers from the European Southern Observatory (ESO), has warned that if the number of satellites in Earth’s orbit exceeds 100,000 (i.e. those with below naked eye visibility) then the human race may lose its ability observe the night sky with modern telescopes.

The issue of satellite streaks appearing in astronomical photos taken from telescopes on the ground has been steadily increasing over the past few years as the number of satellites continues to grow. The biggest culprit has been those in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), primarily mega constellations from SpaceX’s Starlink broadband network, as well as Amazon LEO, OneWeb and more.

The International Astronomical Union (IAU) currently recommends that LEO satellites should have a maximum brightness of magnitude +7 at altitudes of up to 550km. On this scale, the brightest objects actually have the smallest numbers (e.g. brilliant Venus can reach up to -4.6, while the North Star is much dimmer at +2). If satellites are too bright then that can make it much harder to picture the night sky and do other things, such as to spot dangerous asteroids or detect key celestial events.

One other way around this is of course to launch space-based telescopes, but they’re exceedingly complex, hugely expensive and cannot realistically replace the huge coverage that exists across ground-based telescopes. The new ESO report has now brought this debate back into a sharper focus and warned of the “devastating consequences for astronomy” if current plans were to reach even a fraction of their targets. Current proposals exist to launch over 1.7 million satellites into orbit (1 million of these form part of SpaceX’s orbital data centres plan)!

According to the study, no more than 100,000 faint satellites, below naked eye visibility, should orbit Earth, to “safeguard our ability to observe the night sky with modern telescopes“. The study is the first to compute the extent to which large and bright satellite constellations — which have also raised concerns about their impacts on health and the environment — would affect astronomical observations by making the night sky brighter.

“Until now we have managed, but it’s getting worse,” stresses Olivier Hainaut, who has been involved in developing recommendations to mitigate the impact of satellite constellations on astronomy. While companies like SpaceX have taken measures to make their satellites less bright, such as by modifying them and working with SOME large observatories to move satellites out of telescope viewing arcs, the current satellite proposals will ultimately go “beyond the limit” of what astronomy can withstand.

ESO Statement

The new study shows that, for a large fraction of each night, hundreds of satellites would be visible and, at certain times, up to several thousand, similar to the number of stars seen with the naked eye in good conditions. Other planned satellite constellations such as E-Space’s Cinnamon and China’s CTC-1 and 2 would add hundreds of thousands more satellites into orbit, compounding the problem.

Reflect Orbital, a US start-up, aims to launch a constellation of very large mirror-like satellites to provide sunlight at night, with reflected beams that span at least five kilometres on Earth’s surface. They intend to start with a prototype satellite in orbit this year and plan to increase their satellite population to 50 000 by 2035. These satellites would be the brightest ever in orbit, with damaging consequences for dark skies on Earth.

Hainaut’s calculations show that the full constellation would fill the night sky with hundreds of very brightly visible satellites. Seen from within a reflected beam, the satellite delivering sunlight would appear four times brighter than the full Moon. Even if no satellite points its beam directly at an observer, each would be as bright as the planet Venus, the ‘morning star’. From a light-polluted city, like Munich, Germany, these hundreds of satellites would be the only ‘stars’ visible in the night sky.

These proposals, combined with others considered in the study, would dramatically brighten the night sky, hindering humankind’s ability to observe faint cosmic targets, including far-away galaxies, some Earth-like planets around other stars, and even asteroids potentially dangerous to Earth.

In order to compute the impact of all this and other effects of satellite constellations on astronomical observations, Hainaut simulated the positions, motion and brightness of all present and planned satellite constellations. For example, for Starlink, he found that dozens of trails would appear in each image taken two hours into the night with ESO’s Very Large Telescope (VLT) at Paranal Observatory in Chile, representing field-of-view losses of up to 28%. This assumes that the satellites would be faint enough not to be seen with the naked eye in good conditions. If they are just a little brighter, some instruments would be even more affected.

Long story short. The study found that these negative impacts can only be avoided by limiting the total, of both existing and future satellites, to 100,000 satellites faint enough not to be seen with the naked eye from a dark site.

“This is not a hard number, like 99,999 is good and 100,001 is bad: clearly I’d prefer 50,000,” clarified Hainaut. “But 100,000 causes losses at about the level of other technical losses, such as equipment failure.” However, he adds, the satellites must be fainter than visual magnitude 7; should some of them be too bright — above the minimum threshold for naked-eye visibility — the total number would need to be much lower.

The big problem is that, thus far, major world governments and regulators haven’t really acknowledged the seriousness of the problem and still seem to approve the launch of mega constellations without consideration for the wider ramifications.

The ESO, in collaboration with the UK’s Royal Astronomical Society (RAS) and the International Astronomical Union (IAU), are now using the study as the basis for their submissions to counter future launch proposals. But it remains unclear whether they will have the kind of impact necessary to walk the situation back toward some common sense.

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

The SpeedGeo project, which compares internet connection quality by benchmarking the speeds of real users, has published their Q2 2026 results and once again named Virgin Media as the fastest fixed broadband ISP. At the same time they’ve also named Three UK as the fastest mobile broadband (4G, 5G) operator. But there are caveats.

The latest Q2 2026 study is based on data gathered from real measurements conducted by users of their V-SPEED applications, including via their website, as well as on Android, iOS, Windows and macOS. A total of just 98,967 tests were conducted across mobile connections using smartphones or tablets between 1st July 2025 and 30th June 2026, which increased to 864,028 tests for fixed broadband (inc. Wi-Fi and cabled connections).

As with the above note, there are always other caveats to consider with speedtest based studies like this, not least because the results for broadband lines tend to be more reflective of take-up than network availability. For example, some fixed ISPs may have a much larger proportion of customers on slower copper-based lines, which can weigh against those on faster FTTP services with the same provider (i.e. pulling the average down).

The SpeedGeo study also only lists three providers for each of the two categories (fixed and mobile), which misses a lot of key players (e.g. Sky Broadband, TalkTalk, O2) and completely ignores the many significantly faster alternative broadband networks that now exist across the UK. But this is both because of their limited data sample size, and the fact that they only include operators if they account for more than 3% of all tests in a given category and location during a specific quarter.

Otherwise, the operators in both the fixed and mobile categories were all ranked based on average download speed (from highest to lowest), although they’ve also included figures for upload speeds and network latency (milliseconds), which is nice to have. We only wish more studies would do the same.

SpeedGeo – Q2 2026 Fastest UK Fixed Broadband ISPs

SpeedGeo – Q2 2026 Fastest UK Mobile Operators

The SpeedGeo database does give some results for the providers that didn’t make the above ranking, which for fixed broadband shows Sky Broadband as coming in 4th (137.7Mbps download) and TalkTalk in 5th (105.1Mbps). As for mobile, O2 were in 4th place with a download speed of 58.9Mbps. But their data samples for these will be much smaller.

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

Low-cost mobile provider iD Mobile (Currys), which piggybacks off VodafoneThree’s (Three UK) national 4G and 5G network via a virtual operator (mvno) partnership, has reported seeing subscribers grow by +18% over the last year to total 2.6 million (up from 2.3m in January 2026) – putting them ahead of their 2.5m target for the year.

The operator, which is now aiming to reach 2.8 million subscribers before the end of this year, also revealed that they ate some £27m of capital expenditure in the year – mostly of which can be attributed to handsets provided upfront and recovered through customers’ monthly payments. But this was offset by efficiencies in the rest of the business.

According to Currys: “We help customers get the most out of their tech, most importantly through connectivity. iD Mobile, our 100% owned mobile virtual network operator (MVNO), grew subscribers to 2.6m, +18% YoY, ahead of our 2.5m target. iD Mobile is a structurally attractive business. It’s high-margin and recurring, with economics that improve as the base scales, with a distribution advantage through Currys stores and online channels that few MVNOs can match.”

Original article ISPreview UK:Read More

The Runnymede Borough Council (RBC) in Surrey (England) appears to be claiming that “BT have cut off the phone and internet connections“, which a council account on Facebook said had left “as many as 2000 vulnerable residents without their Community Alarm service which summons help in an emergency“. But the reality may be more complex.

The incident, which was first spotted by Thinkbroadband this afternoon, was perhaps initially being a bit miscategorised by the council account, not least because it’s far more likely to be a general network fault than an intentional disconnection (BT would be incredibly unlikely to behave that way toward a local authority).

Speaking of which, the council’s Facebook page and website have since been updated to use a more generic message: “We are currently experiencing some technical disruption to our telephone and online services. Please try again later today. We apologise for any inconvenience.”

ISPreview has contacted BT in the hope of clarifying the situation and when it will be resolved.