While not perfect in every detail, the above presents the picture.
Price Difference: UniFi Ultra vs. TP-Link Archer NX200
The significant price difference between the Ubiquiti UniFi Ultra (£119.97) and the TP-Link Archer NX200 (£199.98) can be explained by several key factors.
1️⃣ Different Market Segments & Features
The UniFi Ultra is primarily a Cloud Gateway (router) designed for UniFi-managed networks, ideal for business and advanced home users.
The TP-Link Archer NX200 is a 5G router, offering mobile broadband connectivity, which significantly increases cost.
2️⃣ Hardware Capabilities
Feature
UniFi Ultra (£119.97)
TP-Link NX200 (£199.98)
Processor
Ubiquiti-designed SOC
More powerful for handling 5G
WiFi Support
❌ No built-in WiFi
✅ WiFi 6 (AX1800) included
5G Connectivity
❌ No 5G support
✅ 5G Modem for cellular internet
Ethernet Ports
More LAN/WAN ports
Fewer LAN/WAN ports
VPN Support
✅ UniFi Teleport VPN
✅ Standard VPN options
Cloud Management
✅ UniFi Controller
✅ www & TP-Link Tether App
5G hardware alone adds a premium to the TP-Link router.
UniFi Ultra is designed for wired setups, where users might already have separate UniFi access points for WiFi.
3️⃣ Target Audience
UniFi Ultra: Best for users who want a wired-first setup and possibly integrate with other UniFi devices.
TP-Link NX200: Ideal for homes, small offices, and remote locations that rely on 5G connectivity.
4️⃣ Software & Ecosystem
Ubiquiti benefits from economies of scale, keeping prices lower due to its enterprise adoption.
TP-Link’s 5G routers are more niche, leading to higher costs for 5G licensing, chipsets, and firmware development.
Conclusion
✔ If you don’t need 5G, the UniFi Ultra is a great value because it’s optimised for a wired network with a UniFi ecosystem.
✔ If you need 5G as a failover or primary connection, the TP-Link NX200 justifies its higher price owing to its integrated 5G modem & WiFi 6.
Factor in UniFi’s modular approach, the total cost quickly surpasses the TP-Link all-in-one solution as below
Cost Breakdown Comparison
Component
UniFi Ultra Setup
TP-Link NX200
Cloud Gateway (Router)
£119.97 (Ultra)
£199.98 (NX200)
5G Backup (UniFi LTE)
£199.99 (U-LTE-Pro)
✅ Included
WiFi 6 Access Point
£129.99 (U6-Lite)
✅ Included
Total Cost
~£450+
£199.98
Key Takeaways
• UniFi Ultra is cost-effective only for wired setups. Adding WiFi & 5G backup increases costs substantially.
• TP-Link NX200 is an all-in-one package, making it cheaper for small offices & homes needing 5G failover.
• UniFi’s modular system scales better for larger networks, while TP-Link is more of a plug-and-play home solution.
💡 If long-term scalability & full UniFi integration are priorities, the Ultra makes sense. Otherwise, TP-Link is the budget-friendly, simpler choice for the extra functionality.
On the other hand, if you prioritise simplicity, built-in WiFi 6, and 5G failover in one device, the TP-Link NX200 is a cost-effective solution that requires no extra purchases - and that latest NX200 chip is a bonus.
Final Summary
Factor
UniFi Ultra
TP-Link NX200
Scalability
✅ High (Modular)
❌ Limited (Standalone)
Integration
✅ Full UniFi
❌ Not part of UniFi
WiFi 6
❌ Not included
✅ Built-in
5G Failover
❌ Requires Add-on
✅ Built-in
Ease of Setup
❌ Complex (Multiple Devices)
✅ Simple (All-in-One)
Long-Term Cost
❌ Expensive (Add-ons Needed)
✅ Much cheaper overall
Ideal For
Large Networks, Enterprise, Advanced Users
Small Offices, Homes, Plug-and-Play Users
💡When one wants a fully integrated solution with 5G failover, built-in WiFi 6, and minimal setup, the TP-Link NX200 is the better choice for this use case. The UniFi Ultra is a great option for those already invested in the UniFi ecosystem, but adding the necessary UniFi hardware to match the TP-Link’s functionality would make it a more unnecessarily complex and expensive setup.
Limited DHCP scope with reservations effectively denies both WiFi and wired devices from automatically obtaining an IP, except for the two reserved ones (Stick PC + Ultra).
How This Works:
✔ Only Stick PC + Ultra Get IPs — Since all other devices fall outside the DHCP scope, they won’t receive an IP.
✔ Blocks Unwanted WiFi & Wired Connections — New devices connecting via WiFi or Ethernet won’t be assigned an IP unless manually configured.
✔ Ensures Controlled Access — You have manual control over who gets on the network by adjusting the DHCP range only when necessary.
Additional Benefits:
🔹 Failover Remains Accessible and balancing — We can always access the TP-Link 5GWAN via the Stick PC or Ultra.
🔹 Security by Design — No rogue DHCP clients can connect without explicit changes.
🔹 Quick Recovery Option — If needed, expand the DHCP range manually to allow new connections.
This tightens security while maintaining essential network operations.
While running two DHCP servers on the same network is generally not advisable, our setup works because:
✔ Strict Scope Limitation on TP-Link — It only serves two reserved devices, so there’s no IP conflict with the Ultra.
✔ Ultra Remains Primary DHCP Server — When it’s active, it handles all normal LAN devices as usual.
✔ Manual Expansion in Failure Mode — If the Ultra goes down, we can easily extend the TP-Link’s scope to cover more devices. and if Swish is down Ultra switches to 5G
✔ Avoids Overlapping IP Assignment — Since the Ultra and TP-Link never serve the same devices, there’s no conflict.
Key Takeaway:
🚀 Two DHCP servers can work if carefully restricted and managed. Our approach is a clever failover-friendly use case, ensuring:
1️⃣ Normal DHCP from Ultra during regular operation.
2️⃣ Restricted emergency DHCP from TP-Link when needed.
3️⃣ Complete network control without unnecessary complexity.
Be aware this case is about journalists, however it shows how widely the court looks at your life, it says beware of thinking you will be judged solely on your current or one past contract in isolation.
Assumption: that you ARE in business on your own account
that said, if you are not and you follow these guides you effectively will be.
I’m too busy, I’m working 80 hours a week
Then sadly you are someone’s employee and you are not in business on your own account. Any business that fails to attend to its needs beyond servicing a service contract is “fiddling while Rome burns”. Business survival demands business operations are not neglected - and this weakness is a vulnerability HMRC will leverage to its never ending advantage. They will easily demonstrate you are a simple employee.
How will they demonstrate this? Evidence. All they need is show that all you do is your “employment work” and little or nothng else. That no business decisions are made, there are no business policies or directions and in past cases that you do not know what a “dividend” is or the duties and responsibilities of a director. How? Principally by asking you and using your answers aganst you. The person asking you ca me an office of HMRC, or a Judge or a Barrister in court. The result is the same if you do not know what you are talking about. Answering with truisms will be seen straight through.
Truism? For example “for what are you responsible?” ans: “I know I am responsible for everything”. That answer tells all present you probably have little idea at all for what you are responsible. It is a “truism”.
“It’ll never happen”. Maybe not. If it does you can lose everything you have (bankruptcy). I take the view in life that where I find the consequences of failure unacceptable, I act to protect myself. I view not doing this is downright foolish. Perhaps I should say “unwise”.
I pay for all this to be done
I regret under the M.S.C. legislation you are likely to be in deep trouble if spotted by HMRC; it may be your service provider who is spotted which then leads to you.
This is a very nasty piece of legislation and in my opinion completely unfair in the present day. However, roughly speaking they are saying you are paying for someone else to run your company like it is a payroll operation - and so they charge you p.a.y.e. on everything.
It’s worse than IR35. Paying for everything to be done for you is said to be having made your company a “managed service company” and your provider a “managed service provider”. I gather some firms of accountants refuse to take on contractors for this reason.
I am doing everything to run my own business
Prove it.
Show me the evidence.
Evidence? What’s that? What do you think it is before you open this?
It’s paperwork. Documents. Signed and dated.
It’s also witness testimony, but from what I have read in judgements in this regard these tend to be at best weak and at worst counter to your case, in spite of the best intentions of the witness.
Day to day life being in business on one’s own account - prove it to the judge.
The executive summary is that if you procrastinate you will cripple my ability to give you what you need. Procrastinate? Not responding to me for hours days, weeks or even months.
ADD? Working with me. My attention is what you want, use it or lose it.
I work in real-time see footnote (i). Given that most of my work involves working with computers as tools of my trade I have borrowed the term which in the Oxford English Dictionary is defined below at said (i).
So for example when I am hired to provide my thinking I do this with immediacy, footnote (ii).
I will engage in conversation (iii) to solve immediate problems and to plan how I think it is best to proceed, often with several choices and always with different thinking, apparently.
These ideas can NOT survive delay, indeed rarely can any advice; it is pretty much all has time of the essence. They are ephemeral. Immediate. As I said “time is of the essence”. Add to that that reporting and payment deadlines directly impact all plans and advice.
For example I spend several days creating a plan based on the information provided. Clearly the information is the foundation of the solutions I come up with. These will be unique to the circumstances and will fail without attention and action. So when I make contact and get no immediate response then I have to change my attention to other matters.
My attention, my focus, is what is being paid for, so to lose it is to waste money as regards its true value. I am not a computer and I cannot be “suspended to continue later where you left off”. It may be that you can do this, but you have hired me because I think differently and for that hidden difference you need to behave differently, which is likely in any case to be the first small step in solving your matter. If you have multiple matters then all this is the more important because they will all be interlinked.
Any matter will have stages and your attention to these directly affects the experience you will have. For example one of the greatest complaints the profession hears is “they took far too long”. Upon enquiry this is all too often because the information provided is incomplete and the work cannot be finished. The missing matters are not provided for several months and yet the time taken to do the work is measured from the initial provision of information.
Case study (1) In a recent example I produced the trial balance within a day and I asked for clarification about director’s loan transactions, while expecting to finish the accounts the following day. Many weeks later I am still waiting and that “job” is long forgotten in my mind. Any advice I may have had or have been generating is gone. That “job” involves 17,000 transactions; I simply can not carry that sort of information in my head for any length of time, let alone complex time dependent financial ideas.
Case study (2) A very worried man comes to me. I find in these circumstances such a person is finding it very difficult to think clearly. They need to be told what to do, to be given procedural instructions. The first thing that becomes apparent is he has no grip at all on his or his business’ finances and his accountants are providing reactive compliance work only, which is perfectly normal at their very cheap price and he never asks. Using “instant messaging” he has to be driven by me to push for the information needed for me to even start work.
So I ask him for basic information on 21 July. I give him the words to send to his accountants. I consider this information to be “basic data” anyone in business (“on their own account”) should have immediately to hand, such as copies of tax returns and calculations for years gone by, also their payments of tax even if reference to their online HMRC account(s) is needed so as to be exact or close to it.
It takes him until 7th August to collect the required data, and the data is not ideal (faulty). That is 17 days. I am not surprised he is stressed to there and back. He is catastrophising. Inventing all sorts of awful scenarios based on imagined “what if” circumstances without having any accurate or complete information.
He tells me he is desperate. I am not surprised. I have said my guidance can vary according to the level of desperation.
I provide my preliminary sets of plans for various scenarios that depend on choices he makes. All of his matters are alive in my mind ready to solve his issues and offer peace of mind.
I have placed no limits as to time of day or weekends when I am available.
His response? Defers conversation with me for several days. Maybe not so desperate, just saying it to generate my sympathy. Actions speak louder than words.
It is as if he wants to get the most extreme advice (which is to engage an insolvency practitioner, not me) thinking he can then decide what to do. That is terrible thinking and demonstrates his lack of understanding of how things work. Things are not black or white, they are ever changing shades of grey.
How “alive” will his matters be in my mind when he eventually contacts me? Remains to be seen. My sympathy? There was never any on my part, which is normal, to me this is just work. Wilful incompetence is not pretty. However, I do not judge, I collect the information that makes the choices pretty obvious. I suppose the worse their case, the easier are the solutions.
Case study (3) A self-build value added tax recovery claim. Several hundred invoices and many very specific rules to be complied with. The case is full of individual transactions that need consideration as well as a list that needs much attention. The matter requires a few hours work by them to complete before seeking construction completion certification. Suffice to say many months indeed years later, with tens of thousands at stake, they have not completed the work. I am at a loss as to why. And they ask me a question based on one of those transactions about which I have given advice. At the time I could have given immediate and effective advice. Several months later? Not really. I give the standard compliance response about VAT fraud and some links, but my real-time quality of service is simply not possible. Very frustrating to have my abilities frustrated like this.
I hear the professional cry “file notes!” Sure, but these are not at all the same as real-time attention, focus and conversation.
(i) OED Chiefly Computing, but…
A. n. The actual time during which a process or event occurs, esp. one analysed by a computer (or me), in contrast to time subsequent to it when processing may be done, a recording replayed, etc (I am exploring the use of recordings) . Frequently in in real time (which technically is not correct use, for example a romantic couple do not spend “real-time” together but they do or would like to spend “real time” with each other, but OED records actual use of English) : performed or occurring in response to a process or event and virtually simultaneously with it.
(ii) OED a. The quality or condition of being immediate; freedom from intermediate or intervening agency or delay; direct relation or connection; directness.
(iii) OED 7. a. Conversation: Interchange of thoughts and words; familiar discourse or talk.