In reply to a post by yarwell:

One big single loop sounds very philantropic

it sounds like communism to me. That's widely regarded as a good idea too, not.

Not at all. It makes no sense economically to have in effect two lor more local loops. It would be no different to Power. We only have a single company providing the National Grid. They do not serve end users. The end users are served by the distribution companies. You can buy your electricity from any of the distribtion companies and they can all compete on pretty level playing field

It would be no different to Power.

however it is fundamentally different to power because electricity is exactly the same for everyone and if my retail supplier goes bust the electric (ditto gas) keeps coming through the meter. Data transit and services aren't the same. If my ISP goes titsup.com or I don't pay my bills it stops working.

You don't buy electricity from distribution companies, you buy it from retailers. My distribution company happens to be part of a power generator that also has a retail arm.

The National Grid provides the backbone very much like we have several fibre and microwave backbones for data - are you proposing to merge all those as well ?

I'm quite happy to have three local loops (telephone, cable TV and FTTH) which each has different capabilities and competition works in Virgin areas.

In reply to a post by yarwell:

It would be no different to Power.

however it is fundamentally different to power because electricity is exactly the same for everyone and if my retail supplier goes bust the electric (ditto gas) keeps coming through the meter. Data transit and services aren't the same. If my ISP goes titsup.com or I don't pay my bills it stops working.

You don't buy electricity from distribution companies, you buy it from retailers. My distribution company happens to be part of a power generator that also has a retail arm.

The National Grid provides the backbone very much like we have several fibre and microwave backbones for data - are you proposing to merge all those as well ?

I'm quite happy to have three local loops (telephone, cable TV and FTTH) which each has different capabilities and competition works in Virgin areas.

THe competition though does not work. In general BT will for instance avoid rolling out new technology to cable areas as it knows its potential market is smaller

If your retail electric supplier went bust potentially you would loose your electricity supply so even you anaolgy does not hold up

An independent local loop would be less of a monopoly then we have now where BT own it

The local Loop could be publicaly owned but put out to tender to a private company to operte and maintain to ensure value for money. You also dont get the conflict of interest that we have with BT owning it

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

The local Loop could be publicaly owned but put out to tender to a private company to operte and maintain to ensure value for money. You also dont get the conflict of interest that we have with BT owning it

Errrr?

Please could you tell us how long the franchise would be, and what incentive such a company would be given to encourage them to invest billions of pounds in any more advanced or comprehensive network than we have now. Bearing in mind that in order to make a profit the prices charged to the distribution companies would inevitably reflect considerably less than the time-span of the franchise.

to ensure value for money

Define "value for money" in this context. Two extremes for example being 98% 2Mbps coverage with 10GB allowances and 90% 100Mbps coverage with truly unlimited allowances, and whatever the costs of each may be.

Or would that be determined by a regulator of some sort, which would also be responsible for the recurring tender invitations and franchise awarding.

You are continually putting out wild and woolly bright ideas about utopian data comms facilities. No meat. No practicality or business feasibility assessments.

yeah and the reason for the oversubscription is obvious.

Lets look at VM vs <insert adsl provider> in my area.

VM start of 2010 launch 10,20,50mbit cable in my area which previously was adsl broadband only. ADSL can get 0-6mbit depending on luck of where you located, yes some lines here dont sync due to line length/quality. VM sync's at full rate regardless.
8 week backlog for installs and within 2 months of launch is fully subbed on capacity and oversubscribed.
VM have done some reseg's and work on improving performance, their docsis3 network now is adequate in this area but still lightly congested, however generally beats BT services down hard. Their docsis1 network on paper Beats BT services but the congestion on that makes it not fit for purpose.
Now today, I am on a 30mbit VM cable service that has some light congestion but is still giving me 28-29mbit throughput on a sunday evening. The upstream congestion has improved enough that I can use things like ssh most of the time but still bursts of silly lag.
My adsl line with xilo now (ukonline RIP) drops once or twice a week and is currently synced at 5.5mbit. 1/6th of the speed I have on VM and I am not even on VM's top tier for my area, scary.
My VM gives me 1.05 up on speedtest.net, the adsl line 0.68 up.

So as far as my area is concerned VM have it sown up. The exception probably been in if a gamer adsl will probably be preferable. Incidently VM have upload speed uplift's due here in august 2011 and 100mbit services due sept 2011, BT say the area isnt viable for FTTC not just my immediate area but the entire city and suburbs.

So for some of us, its BT not doing the investing,

Edited by Chrysalis (Sun 06-Feb-11 20:07:03)

THe competition though does not work. In general BT will for instance avoid rolling out new technology to cable areas as it knows its potential market is smaller

You're clearly wrong there, because BT is indeed doing FTTC in Cable areas precisely because competition does work and they don't want to lose customers to faster cable services.

If your retail electric supplier went bust potentially you would loose your electricity supply so even you anaolgy does not hold up

you demonstrably have no understanding. My retail electricity supplier did go bust, as it happens. The regulator transfers you to a default supplier if you don't take action. To loose my supply would mean someone coming round and pulling the fuse out of my incomer - I hope they send a big bloke if they want to try that.

The whole point is that electricity (an analogy you introduced, by the way) is different to comms in that it is absolutely the same to all consumers and it isn't a point to point service.

an update, seems one suburb is deemed viable by BT now, so one tiny part of the city. Maybe BT will break the 10mbit barrier here by 2020.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

an update, seems one suburb is deemed viable by BT now, so one tiny part of the city. Maybe BT will break the 10mbit barrier here by 2020.

BT in effect have a monopoly. They have no great incentive to roll out FTTC other then at a pedestrian pace

Would BT rollout a lot faster if they faced competition? The answer is clearly yes

BT's approach will be why spend Bilions in upgrading the network when it faces no real loss of revenue if it does not

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

Would BT rollout a lot faster if they faced competition? The answer is clearly yes

BT's approach will be why spend Bilions in upgrading the network when it faces no real loss of revenue if it does not

Who else is going to spend even more billions with no comparable existing infrastructure to link to and no established customer base, including other ISPs and their customers as well as BT Retail customers in that count?

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

an update, seems one suburb is deemed viable by BT now, so one tiny part of the city. Maybe BT will break the 10mbit barrier here by 2020.

BT in effect have a monopoly. They have no great incentive to roll out FTTC other then at a pedestrian pace

Would BT rollout a lot faster if they faced competition? The answer is clearly yes

BT's approach will be why spend Bilions in upgrading the network when it faces no real loss of revenue if it does not

BT does not have a monopoly in Fibre networks at current, hence why it is rolling out FTTC/FTTH as fast as it can, without providing more investment to fund it.

Where will this competion come from, you fail to mention this.

BT has been upgrading its network continuously, you always invest back into you're product over time to reduce costs and increase revenue.