http://blog.thinkbroadband.com/2017/02/speed-test-qu...

Two of the metrics there are effectively measuring contention, not the theory but what people are seeing from actual speed tests.

Oddly the weak copper/aluminium system seems to do rather better than the heavy duty coax network.

Of course you can get the public on board with well run campaigns, but its never clear if the public understand what they are lobbying over, since for the broadband campaigns run in the last year those who talk about why they are signing whatever are signing for things other than what those running the campaign are aiming for.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Oddly the weak copper/aluminium system seems to do rather better than the heavy duty coax network.

Indeed. Doesn't reflect too well given HFC is far superior in just about every way apart from where the contention point is. Difference between point to point solutions and broadcast media.

I am aware of lobbying but not active consultations around the world.

It is akin to asking a criminal permission to put him in jail.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I am aware of lobbying but not active consultations around the world.

It is akin to asking a criminal permission to put him in jail.

It's akin to a meeting between managers and staff where managers consult staff on a way forward.

As far as consultations go operators have as much right as anyone else to respond to them.

Regulators are there to try and work with operators where possible - enforcement actions are, and always should be, a last resort when the regulated body refuses to work with the regulator on the way forward, or their cooperation is considered inadequate.

Edited by deleted (Wed 22-Feb-17 08:46:05)

Have done some preliminary work on product splits that is automated rather than previous more manual so will be interesting to see how the Virgin averages work out

except the problem is you end up with regulation which is only agreed upon when it has no affect on their bottom line, e.g. the very soft 10% requirement to advertise a speed.

I am pretty sure the average joe public does not get the same access to ofcom as a executive of a isp does.

What do you class as inadequate, a isp refusing to accept average speed advertising?

The isps wont agree to something that costs them money. If their agreement is required then any regulation is going to be soft. Presumably BT dont like average speeds because it would require some investment ni the copper loop to rectify which they dont want to do.

Do lawmakers consult with the public before making laws? The whole arrangement seems too cosy.

I go live with virginmedia tomorrow, after a tonne of issues with BTs pricing (retention's promising deals and bills being different). Mainly moving for the TV, and I do not remember the last time I used a laptop at home (usually tablets or streaming on tvs) so broadband isn't my main concern.

I will report my speedtests at peak hours.

I have been in a very congested VM area in the past, generally speaking they were very good about handling and acknowledging it hence why I am moving back. I found their CS to be very good.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

except the problem is you end up with regulation which is only agreed upon when it has no affect on their bottom line, e.g. the very soft 10% requirement to advertise a speed.

I am pretty sure the average joe public does not get the same access to ofcom as a executive of a isp does.

What do you class as inadequate, a isp refusing to accept average speed advertising?

The isps wont agree to something that costs them money. If their agreement is required then any regulation is going to be soft. Presumably BT dont like average speeds because it would require some investment ni the copper loop to rectify which they dont want to do.

Do lawmakers consult with the public before making laws? The whole arrangement seems too cosy.

You don't only end up with agreed upon regulation. See LLU, ever-dropping wholesale charges etc.

Emboldened section: yes.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications?publicati...

I sort of agree with you that it is reasonable to ask the companies if they can provide constructive reasons why regulation should not be introduced.

However that should be where it ends, so e.g. if BT say well if we have average speed advertising it will hurt our sales, that reason should be considered not important as the regulator should have absolutely no concern over companies sales, they not a shareholder.

BT can always rollout FTTP e.g. to improve average speeds, its not as if they dont have options. So I hope that explains my opinion a bit better.