It doesn't need to be sold of course. It could "just" be separated with the existing shareholders holding stakes in the company in the manner that O2 was split. I say "just" as there are enormously complex legal & financial issues to sort out on allocation of debt, pension deficit liabilities, IPRs and much else.
However, if it was separated out, what the report doesn't pin down is exactly how that will change incentives. OR will be a £5bn a year yet this group of MPs want it to finance what would be a £20-25bn FTTP programme to be done in a short timescale (where would the workforce come from?). Where would investors come from to stump up the cash required unless the market fundamentals were changed? Why would OR pump capex into areas where there's no prospect of a return? The issues would surely just remain the same. OR have to react to VM quickly (which really means g.fast in urban areas as it's relatively quick to implement with least disruption) and rural areas are not suddenly going to find that OR has suddenly got a pot of gold to deal with their issues.
In other words, an OR separation on its own changes nothing.
nb. the report has basic errors. For instance, it says that BT has received £1.7bn from BDUK whilst the accounts show about £700m so far.
Edited by TheEulerID (Sat 23-Jan-16 10:57:33)