G.Network's investor-led acquisition: key M&A Opportunity? For who?

G.Network goes from distressed Altnet to a discounted, high-quality urban infrastructure platform ready to go.

On 5 January 2026, it was announced that G.Network, the London-focused full fibre broadband provider, was acquired by FitzWalter Capital in a lender-led transaction. The sale brings to a head the situation of the Altnet provider’s significant debt struggles and financial pressures also being felt in the broader Altnet sector.

Much of the public commentary to date has focused on headline debt levels and subscriber numbers, with less attention paid to the detailed structure of the network footprint itself.

This note examines G.Network’s position using Point Topic’s granular broadband availability data, focusing on the geographic concentration of its build, the extent of competitive overlap with other fibre networks, and the scale of premises where G.Network remains the sole FTTP provider. On that basis, we outline a small number of plausible post-acquisition scenarios and identify the factors that are likely to shape the network’s strategic attractiveness to potential buyers or partners.

Firstly, let’s look at the key metrics for context:

Key Numbers 

Metric	Value	Source
G.Network London footprint	272k premises	Point Topic
Customers	~25,000	FT via ISPreview
Take-up rate	5%	FT (25k customers / ~250k RFS)
Net debt	~£300m	FT via ISPreview
Exclusive footprint (not overbuilt)	157k premises (58%)	Point Topic
Overbuilt by Hyperoptic/CF	115k premises (42%)	Point Topic

Using our UPC Query Agent, we conducted a detailed assessment drawing on our granular UK broadband availability datasets.  Our analysis begins with an examination of G.Network’s full fibre footprint and its competitive positioning within the UK full fibre network landscape.

G.Network’s top 3 boroughs (Westminster, Camden, Islington) represent 70.2% of the total footprint, demonstrating extreme geographic concentration in prime Central London locations.

SEE SUBSCRIBER SITE FOR TABLES, CHARTS AND MAPS

The overbuild analysis (Table 2) reveals G.Network faces relatively contained Altnet competition compared to many UK Altnet operators, with its main competitive pressure coming from one dominant rival, Hyperoptic, that maintains a similar focus on high-density MDUs in London. 

SEE SUBSCRIBER SITE FOR TABLES, CHARTS AND MAPS

Hyperoptic is the Dominant Competitive Threat

• 79k premises overlap represents G.Network's primary head-to-head Altnet competition; accounting for nearly 29% of G.Network's entire footprint.

• In these overlap areas, customers have a choice between at least 2 full fibre Altnets (plus Openreach/Virgin).

Community Fibre: Significant but Secondary Overlap

• 50k premises (18.4%) creates meaningful competition in specific boroughs.

• However, the analysis noted 1.39m premises where Community Fibre operates without G.Network presence.

• This 96% non-overlapping footprint makes Community Fibre the strongest acquisition candidate.

• A merger would consolidate London Altnet market rather than create redundant infrastructure.

Openreach: Nationwide Coverage with Gaps in London

• The incumbent materially behind G.Network in these boroughs.

• Lambeth experiences the most Openreach pressure at 66.7% network overlap.

• G.Network faces dual competition in the area from both Openreach and Hyperoptic and Community Fibre’s 85.2% network overbuild.

G.Network’s strongest Broadband Revenue Density Areas by footprint:

Using our UK Broadband Geography by Local Authority Ward granular data tool, we can get a clear picture of the monthly revenue density (£/km²) by technology for G.Network’s key coverage areas.

Westminster has 167k premises served by 14 network operators offering copper, HFC, and gigabit-capable services.  Figure 1 below shows the lowest and highest density areas of the borough.  High Density areas (marked in dark green) are comprised of dense urban areas, high take-up rates and premium pricing areas with £10,000+/km² monthly revenue.

SEE SUBSCRIBER SITE FOR TABLES, CHARTS AND MAPS

The Church Street area has the highest revenue density with monthly FTTP revenue coming in at £97,370/km² .   This is followed by £72,712/km² in Vincent Square and £70,627/km² in Pimlico South for monthly FTTP revenue.

Using our Network Valuation Tool we have carried out an operationally focused analysis grounded in the revenue comparison metrics of G.Network, Hyperoptic, and Community Fibre (Figure 2). 

The network valuation tool suggests that G.Network’s fibre assets and c.25k subscriber base would be operationally complementary for both Community Fibre and Hyperoptic, albeit for different reasons.

SEE SUBSCRIBER SITE FOR TABLES, CHARTS AND MAPS

Community Fibre’s profile is characterised by strong pricing tier performance but comparatively low ARPU with increasing take-up. Acquiring G.Network’s fibre network concentrated in dense, high-value London postcodes, would immediately improve Community Fibre’s revenue mix and ARPU profile.

Hyperoptic has a well-established and strong commercial execution and customer acquisition capability. Absorbing G.Network’s assets would allow Hyperoptic to apply its proven go-to-market model to an under-penetrated network, unlocking value quickly through improved conversion rates.

Best acquisition candidates & strategic rationale:

Again, using our UPC Query Agent we can provide a more detailed strategic rationale for the best acquisition candidates in our opinion based on overlap analysis and complementary footprints.  

Community Fibre (BEST FIT)

Why it makes strategic sense

Complementary footprint: 1.39m unique premises NOT overlapping with G.Network + 50k overlapping = 96% additive.

Geographic synergy: Both London-focused operators.

Combined scale: ~1.7M premises in London = credible #2 Altnet in capital (behind Virgin).

CityFibre (if expanding London presence)

Why it could work

Virtually zero overlap: G.Network operates in areas CityFibre hasn't prioritised.

Strategic gap-fill: CityFibre is underweight in Central London's premium areas.

Challenge: CityFibre focuses on wholesale; G.Network may have retail operations to integrate/wind down.

Hyperoptic (Consolidation Play)

Why less likely but logical

Direct competitor: 29% overlap = 79k premises of direct competition.

Eliminate competitor: Remove head-to-head competition in overlap areas.

Challenge: High overlap means less additive value, potential regulatory scrutiny on market concentration.

TalkTalk or Sky (Unusual but strategic fit)

Why it makes strategic sense

Unusual buyer profile: Both TalkTalk and Sky have plenty of experience with LLU and owning the last mile with acquisitions and projects in their past.

Cost arbitrage vs wholesale: Internalising access costs in London could materially improve unit economics particularly for high-ARPU urban customers and bundled media propositions.

Demand certainty advantage: As large retail ISPs they bring guaranteed take-up to the network, materially improving utilisation rates.

Challenge: TalkTalk is not presently well-positioned to afford the purchase on a stand-alone basis without raising fresh capital, diluting equity, or partnering with investors.  Sky could comfortably afford to purchase G.Network, both financially and strategically. The constraint would be strategy and governance and prior experience, not balance sheet capacity.

Conclusion

G.Network represents a highly targeted and strategically valuable London fibre asset, characterised by exceptional geographic concentration, strong exposure to premium revenue-density areas, and a comparatively favourable overbuild profile.

Despite financial distress, the underlying network fundamentals are potentially very strong, particularly in Central London MDU-heavy boroughs where competitive intensity is concentrated but manageable. These characteristics materially reinforce the acquisition case, with Community Fibre emerging as the most compelling buyer, followed by selective consolidation or gap-fill strategies from Hyperoptic, CityFibre, or well-capitalised retail ISPs such as Sky.

In this context, G.Network should be viewed less as a distressed Altnet and more as a discounted, high-quality urban infrastructure platform whose value can be unlocked through scale, improved utilisation, and strategic integration.

---

Want to dive deeper into the acquisition of G.Network or gain other valuable key commercial insights to supercharge your UK telecoms strategy?  Want to get actionable insights in minutes, not weeks?

Watch our quick video to see exactly how we pulled together key data using: UPC Query Agent | UK Broadband Geography | Network Valuation Tool 

The complete report of this analysis is available to our subscribers here.

Please get in touch if you would like to find out more about UK Plus or particular publications.