In reply to a post by Koppo:

Andrue: Llandudno is not 21cn afaik, where did you hear that? It's Market 2 atm, with C&W also putting kit in there before Summer. There's a WBC desert stretching along the North Wales coastline after Rhyl and BT have shown no interest.

Yeah you're right. Guess BT must've cancelled it. Back when my Dad was tussling with TT it was claimed on Samknows to be imminent. Interesting to see that some other LLUOs are entering the market there at last.

Edited by Andrue (Fri 11-Mar-11 21:05:24)

Cable is unfortunately not available here,

Do the adverts for Virgin Cable Media make you furious also ? Why should 'BT' be obliged to upgrade your exchange ?

is there any way to get BT to upgrade our exchange?

Yes, pay them lots of money.

I see you live in London Zarjaz?

No veiled gloating in your contribution then eh?

that was before tax and before the paid of some of their debt

also why should a company be force to invest their money in area where they will not make the money back.

using the logic why don't we force you to sell your house to fund high speed internet.

BT as well as all other communications companies are there to make money not run as a charity.

Also as alot of people in towns are on LLU any money you pay to BT would not help us.

Longer the lines and less dense the area is as general rule the money it will cost to provide, maintain and upgrade.

I live both in the city and in a rural area with only 5 k lines over a huge area, i don't have any false idea the BT or anyone else should waste money providing fast internet. If users want/need it they should pay enough money to make it least slightly profitable

What's London got to do with it?

why should a company be force to invest their money in area where they will not make the money back.

Who'd be able to force them? Careful in your choice of phrasing. What you should have said is, "Why should a company choose to invest their money....etc".

Let's run with that. By your logic, why have BT chosen to upgrade an exchange 20 minutes away from me to 21cn this month AND install FTTC in Sept this year, when that exchange serves less residential and business lines than the one I am connected to?

I'll tell you why and it's a common theme if you look at the 21cn and fibre roll-outs: That exchange was Market 3, or better already. It seems BT are less concerned with feasibility and costs versus profit and more concerned about trying to tout business away from LLU operators and Virgin (in those areas served by it). A marketing strategy that has so far catastrophically failed in South Wales and a source of much merriment for me.

As for the guy above, making snide remarks along the lines of

Do the adverts for Virgin Cable Media make you furious also ? Why should 'BT' be obliged to upgrade your exchange ?

when that poster lives in London, i.e. "I can get absolutely any broadband service I want by whatever means I want - screw you Jack, I'm alright". That's the relevance. Shouldn't have needed an explanation really.

You feel that they should install something to provide you with better internet even if it does not make sense with business development or finance wise.

They will look at competitors, predicted uptake sometimes have competitors might hinder you getting upgraded othertimes it might help. the choice is BT its their money

Business will always invest money where they will get the best return for their money, be that keeping a customer base, get new customer or offering new product that will make them more money (or any combination of those reasons)

So what you are wanting is OFCOM or the government to force BT to upgrade the network that provides you.

There no other way than to either wait until it make business sense (which could be a while or require funding from resident or other parties) or force them to upgrade at their cost.

There could be many reasons that has made Openreach deem you exhange as not worth upgrading for anything, lack of easy access to back haul, no room at or around the exchange, planning restrictions and many others.


To give you an idea, let say I give you £100,000 to invest in one of the two options

Option a) exchange where you will make the money back within 5 years and after than make £10000 profit a year

Option b) exchange where you will make your money back after 10 years and after than make £1000 profit per year.

Which option would you or anyone else choose. The one which gives you the best return on your money.

busienss with shareholder must always do what is best for the company, even if the CEO wanted to give everyone free broadband for a year he could not do it as the shareholder have legal protection. Therefore they have to invest their money where they will get the best return for the business.

The only way to override business sense would be to force them, hence why i said and still maintain you want someone to force BT openreach to upgrade their network in your area.

People should not have voted conservative in the past and elect a government that privatised everything they could.

If BT was still owed (or even another company) by the government I would then agree with you they have a duty of care to ensure every has decent access within reason. But alas BT is private so can do what they want when it comes to investing their money.

After all if its a easily viable project to upgrade the network in your area then you could club together and do it yourself, other places have.

Edited by deleted (Sat 12-Mar-11 16:02:14)

In reply to a post by Cobra001:

If BT was still owed (or even another company) by the government I would then agree with you they have a duty of care to ensure every has decent access within reason. But alas BT is private so can do what they want when it comes to investing their money.

Because of course all government owned organisations are well run and the epitome of good business. They are known for investing in the latest technology and always provide the highest service levels. They have the advantage of benefiting directly from the expertise of senior politicians whose track record in guiding our great nation speaks for itself.

Er...

More likely if we BT was still government owned we wouldn't even have ADSL and we'd be paying far more for our bills. It amazes me how many people still think that nationalisation is a good idea.

I did not say that it would be any better under government control, all I said was that if it was still under government control then access for all would be an onjective which they would have to consider, under the current system access for all is not even considered when it comes to upgrading an the area network.

though i do think if bt open reach had been something like network rail we would be in a better position.


The problem is not that its private or public if that was the case, the problem is we are all wanting fast internet without paying for it. If I remember correctly we the 2nd cheapest country in the developed world. Yet our population is small and we have many areas where we have numerous people seriously spread out compared to many other countries. We are trying to make the network operators upgrade the infrastructure but not make any more money or charge us any extra. It just does nto really work

Alas the reality that money talks is very true.

Why has one exchange being upgraded and another not? No idea, but with 5500 exchanges to look after and remembering that the original ADSL roll-out too five years then it is no surprise that WBC is not fast

TalkTalk started its LLU rollout in 2006, 5 years later it is still rolling out. Also with TalkTalk at the exchange you can buy off some smaller providers who buy the wholesale products from TalkTalk Business, i.e. get better customer service