I have looked into this quickly.

on website retail prices, the 3 month introduction offers between 10mbit VM and BT infinity are almost the same. So if VM can sell out here then the 3 month price for infinity wouldnt have been too high. At the end of the 3 months it changes to around £3 a month difference, VM's 10mbit actually seems overpriced in comparison. BT seem to be underselling their product in desperation for takeup as I didnt expect prices that low. In addition historical data also tends to show even tho people are poorer they dont spend much less on broadband and tv on average than weathier people. In fact a millionaire I personally know is on O2's cheapest product. Before that he was on tiscali. He is not tight in general but like most of the country he undervalues broadband.

Edited by Chrysalis (Wed 09-Feb-11 22:27:27)

demand data is very skewed.

Regardless of wealth a small community area is always going to do well vs a larger area, as campaigning will be far easier, also the problem that inner city areas tend to have less expansion due to lack of space which means BT's out dated database had the property count too low for these smaller areas. I certianly had no one knocking on my door or pushing leaflets through it telling me to vote. Not to mention the cheating that probably went on.

Edited by Chrysalis (Wed 09-Feb-11 22:31:04)

There is only so much you can do with copper wire, there comes a time when you need the reliability of fibre cables, and you might as well utilize the speed enhancements that come along with it.

they should then replace all the copper with fibre country wide, not cherry pick who gets it and who doesn't, then everyone could be connected via fiber to their existing isp,and speed ,ect my local area too they select the most affluent parts,

of course they should, but they have been dodging and weaving on this from day one on adsl.

first it was the very conservative 43db attenuation needed for 0.5mbit broadband.
then it was the 43db limit on 2mbit broadband, still very low compared to what a unfaulty 43db line should do.
The purpose of both of these limits was to avoid the need to have to work on a line to provide service, 44db attenuation and cant sync? no problem reject order.
then we had adsl max, the line profiles and all that came with it, the deliberate policy of delaying ramp up's so user's with lines that had changing conditions wouldnt notice their speeds going up and down a lot unless checking sync speed on router. Even in the early days reporting a line fault was tricky getting BT to actually do work up on the pole, junction box etc. Later on they started tricks to falsify fault numbers such as making customers agree to fee's before callout's to deter isps doing faults and time limited engineer visits. Plus the policy of checking end user equipment first and if anything wrong found an assumption made BT's side is all and well.
now with vdsl they even stopped accessing the stats altogether on BT supplied modem's.
also the long line policy for faults, if line over a certian db it had a different procedure which typically was blame line length for problems.

Its no surprise people here will defend BT.

rural areas in the UK have it great compared to other countries as BT have served those areas well.

I wonder if everyone should ask their local millionaires to upgrade their exchanges for them?

And those properties that cost £10,000 to fibre up?

Dunno about that, but all isp's could unite and all contribute so everyone can benefit, and eventually leading to a return in their investment , but as for problematic lines FTTC wont be the answer, as it will be in some cases if not most of them, the existing copper(d-side)from street cab to home at fault, unless bt are going to replace these failing,aged cables that sometimes are not even placed in ducting, just buried under the footpath next to 240vac incoming mains supplies too?

Edited by tommy45 (Wed 09-Feb-11 23:25:05)

In reply to a post by tommy45:

all isp's could unite and all contribute so everyone can benefit, and eventually leading to a return in their investment

ISPs generating profits? When did that start to happen?

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I know what other people want, is as ignition said. They want the speed but they want it also for nothing. Thanks to ofcom policy.

At last we can mostly agree