General Discussion
  >> General Broadband Chatter


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


  Print Thread
Standard User RobertoS
(elder) Sun 01-Feb-15 01:08:27
Print Post

Our esteemed editor ...


[link to this post]
 
... is in the News again smile.

My broadband basic info/help site - www.robertos.me.uk | Domains,site and mail hosting - Tsohost.
Connection - Plusnet UnLim Fibre (FTTC). Sync ~ 57.2/15.3Mbps @ 600m. - IPv4BQM IPv6BQM

"Angels can fly because they can take themselves lightly." - G K Chesterton.
Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Sun 01-Feb-15 08:55:54
Print Post

Re: Our esteemed editor ...


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
And a good point too smile

Would have been interesting to see how Fujitsu fared on the number of retailers and consumer take-up

Also if they had won enough Ofcom might have had to withdraw SMP and margin squeeze rulings from BT

The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User Andrue
(knowledge is power) Sun 01-Feb-15 15:40:31
Print Post

Re: Our esteemed editor ...


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
It does seem as if nothing that BT could have done would have resulted in a positive response.

Accused of overcharging despite the fact they won the bidding process then when they come in under budget and say they will extend their plans they get criticised again.

---
Andrue Cope
Brackley, UK

Edited by Andrue (Sun 01-Feb-15 16:41:56)


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Sun 01-Feb-15 16:03:31
Print Post

Re: Our esteemed editor ...


[re: Andrue] [link to this post]
 
Pragmatism is not a headline grabber. Evil BT is.

BT is in this game to make money as would any other bidder have been, wonder how many dropped out when the refund councils if works, if costs more you shoulder burden became apparent.

Final 5% will be interesting no BT so campaigmers should be happier

The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User TheEulerID
(member) Sun 01-Feb-15 16:32:27
Print Post

Re: Our esteemed editor ...


[re: Andrue] [link to this post]
 
You do wonder if about PAC's logic. Would they rather actual costs had been increased to match the bids? Perhaps they could have gold plated the cabinets. Or employed a large number of consultants at extortionate rates to project manage the whole thing.

Also, it's premature to judge savings at this stage. The cost model was built on an even roll-out of the mix of solutions and environments. With the more cost effective stuff being done first, it seems inevitable that some costs will increase although I still thing the great majority of

Also, as NAC noted, as BT are liable for any downside, that is actuals exceeding what was anticipated, they had to build in a contingency (5-8%). As payments are on actuals, they will only get that contingency if it's necessary. In addition, this isn't calculated nationally (so an overspend in one area would counteract an underspend in another). It's project by project.

Anybody who has been involved in complex bids will tell you they are a great deal of work, and there were dozens in BDUK, all of which will have involved separate assessments according to the local conditions, requirements and local priorities. That's against the background of a lot of unknowns with regard to detail (which is why a model will have been used). It's hardly surprising that there's significant difference between the actuals and bid price and the latter is somewhat higher than the former.
Standard User Chrysalis
(legend) Fri 06-Feb-15 09:50:43
Print Post

Re: Our esteemed editor ...


[re: RobertoS] [link to this post]
 
gov has to take it on the chin, BT are a commercial entity and as such they will want to make a profit.

If they didnt want anyone to make a profit then they should have rolled it out themselves.

Standard User Oliver341
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Fri 06-Feb-15 14:02:16
Print Post

Re: Our esteemed editor ...


[re: Chrysalis] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Chrysalis:
If they didnt want anyone to make a profit then they should have rolled it out themselves.

Imagine the paranoia if the government owned the DSLAMs!

Oliver.
  Print Thread

Jump to