Noted, but none of that is "cloud hosting". I do agree, however, that their move to AWS does seem to indicate that they believe AWS to be more reliable than their own hosting infrastructure. I do have to question if the person who made that decision internally has researched this "presumption" in detail, because it sometimes is not the case.
But so what if it is more reliable? I personally still don't see what the big deal is. I don't host with them anyway. Maybe if I did, I would see things differently. But their roots are in broadband. I called them up over a decade ago to enquire about Linux hosting (dedicated servers) and they were not even offering those. I admit, I found that odd at the time, and personally, that was enough to demonstrate to me that they were not a serious hosting provider, certainly compared to other companies around at that time. So in my opinion, hosting has never been their strong point anyway; purely an after thought for a company founded by the demand for broadband in the UK.