What I'm saying is, Virgin could have started offering these recent speeds many many years ago, if they had BT would have been forced to react to stay in the game. Even now the take up of 50Mb is low.

As for innovation that's a bit of a cheap dig, BT have and still are very innovative. They invented Blown Fibre...... after all.

In reply to a post by GMAN98:

What I'm saying is, Virgin could have started offering these recent speeds many many years ago, if they had BT would have been forced to react to stay in the game. Even now the take up of 50Mb is low.

As for innovation that's a bit of a cheap dig, BT have and still are very innovative. They invented Blown Fibre...... after all.

BT could have started moving towards a fibre based last mile a very long time ago.

It was privatised 27 years ago. It is now investing 2.5bn upgrading its last mile network. Divide 2.5bn by 27 and it's not a particularly big sum.

Where we agree, I think, is that the expansion of the VM network and the impending LTE/4G services are the reason for BT's FTTC programme.

Except that for all the reasons already covered in this thread, the former is slow to non-existent, and the latter is still some time away and will not provide very many people with "superfast broadband". At least, not at the same time.

The other and perhaps main reason for BT's sudden decision to actually invest in its last mile network is what I alluded to above - on the front page there's a news item suggesting that the number of fixed landlines is in decline.

Yesl... the traditional phone business is dead so it has to diversify, it has been doing this for many years already but in terms of the UK it does now need to be able to offer greater speeds and bundle services on top of that to make money.

The ISP's and Virgin are seriously looking at a new network although at this stage it is more a feasability study.. Regulation is not working and BT are still hindering rollout. It is not an ideal time to invest though with the current banking crisis. Virgin in particular understand the need to expand their network the big issue is finance and gettting an acceptable ROI They are increasingly coming around to the view that to get an acceptable ROI this network will need to be open. I think they would need reassurance from the regulator that BT would not have access to it for a period of years to allow this network to get established and recover the capital investment.

The other aspects to consider is that fised line voice is in decline and all the growth is in data and TV in particular Virgin is capable of offering HS data lines at a modest cost something BT cannot easilly do.

Virgin can see that the time to market is becoming quite critical aand if the prefered option of using the BT ducting cannot be achieved soon then they will very seriously lok at the plan B ie this new local loop

Edited by deleted (Sun 10-Apr-11 20:39:35)

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

I think they would need reassurance from the regulator that BT would not have access to it for a period of years to allow this network to get established and recover the capital investment.

Yet Virgin want full access to BT's ducts? Come on man lets get real here!

So your saying that Virgin is in talks to plan to open up their existing 50% to everyone else but BT and also work with these "others" to create new plant in the remaining 50% but also block out BT?

All of the while this group of others has access to everything of BT's?

It's at this point Bob is asked to provide hard info to backup his posting and the silence will be deafening....

So come on Bob lets have the links to this fantastic info you have................

I had the feeling when this thread was started that a number of contributors would be far more concerned about a possible threat to BT than discussing how the country's broadband infrastrutcture could be improved.

Perhaps it would be of help in this thread especially for people to state their connections with BT and whether or not they own shares in the business.

--

No connection with BT
Partner started working for Virgin Media supply chain management last year

In reply to a post by mrnelster:

In reply to a post by MHC:

Please can I have half of your garden? I know you have paid for it, but as you are not using it for growing profitable crops, I would like to take it over and use it to cultivate my own crop of cannabis plants.

Yeah man! Lol!

Can you explain your reply?

You seem to want a company to surrender its assets - but cannot see the analogy to surrendering YOUR property because someone else wants to use it in a different way.

Leave the local loop with BT and if other want to install their own then let them with EXACTLY the same conditions and oblkigations. BT should not be forced to allow others to use their network at below cost.

Registering might be a start?

I'm all for improving BB across the UK but by businesses that want to actually build it, not come in a poach off others. Everyone charging more for BB in the first place might get some proper investment going

In reply to a post by MHC:

In reply to a post by mrnelster:

In reply to a post by MHC:

Please can I have half of your garden? I know you have paid for it, but as you are not using it for growing profitable crops, I would like to take it over and use it to cultivate my own crop of cannabis plants.

Yeah man! Lol!

Can you explain your reply?

You seem to want a company to surrender its assets - but cannot see the analogy to surrendering YOUR property because someone else wants to use it in a different way.

Leave the local loop with BT and if other want to install their own then let them with EXACTLY the same conditions and oblkigations. BT should not be forced to allow others to use their network at below cost.

It seems slightly unfair to compare business assets to personal assets. Indeed BT has human investors and employees, but ultimately this is not comparable to turfing someone out of their house or taking their private possessions, as an inanimate PLC versus an individual.

However, I still agree with the fundamental point that any capitalist company will not willingly surrender their prize assets; and presumably if they did so willingly the directors would be in breach of their obligations to shareholders!