Our esteemed editor ...

... is in the News again .

And a good point too

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

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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!