You are only what you are when no one is looking - Robert C. Edwards
OFTEL has said that it will not get involved if BT charges competitors large sums to use its next generation broadband network.
BT wanted to invest £1.5 billion in its new network, but didn't want to do that if it would have to hire it out to its rivals for chicken feed.
The government wants BT to go ahead with the scheme which will result in British punters getting broadband speeds which are ten times faster than now and enable a house to use different high-bandwidth services at the same time.
BT will run fibre optic cables to roadside cabinets offering speeds of between 40Mb and 100Mb a second.
Ofcom, the telecoms regulator, yesterday gave BT free rein to set the prices rivals such as BSkyB and Carphone Warehouse will have to pay to gain access.
Under the existing rules, Ofcom fixes the prices charged by BT's local networks division, Openreach.
That is also up for review with BT wanting to jack the prices up.
Ofcom said the deal was not a free-for-all on BT pricing. Openreach will have to charge all customers, including the separate BT Retail division, "on equal terms and without favour". µ
L'Inq
The Guardian
We should have this new network infrastructure open for bidding. Any decent firm should be able to submit a bid to buy and build a piece of this network.
It's about time we got rid of the publicly funded, government backed, BT moonopoly, and all the bad practices and high prices it brings with it.
"on equal terms and without favour"
As long as the wholesale price IS IN FACT the same charge from BT Wholesale to BT Retail and ALL OTHER providers!!!
BT's commercial arm that handles the network should be broken apart from the retail arm, leaving the retail side of things as just another 3rd party.
As far as I understand your story and the business arrangements involved, it seems that Openreach can charge unrelated service providers ten times what the service costs, providing they charge BT Retail the same, and the end customer with no choice is willing to pay. If BT is separate from BT Retail, why should BT worry about having such a monopoly? And if they are not totally separate, why should they worry anyway, as the arrangement could be so profitable? Would it matter if BT Retail failed and shut up shop?
Lets hope this works out well, my shares in BT could use a boost.
ah... privatisation was the best thing to happen to bt *cough* *splutter* the cutomers will benefit etc etc...
sounds like it was all for the benefit of the shareholders
may they rot in hell for all eternity the greedy unscrupulous scum!
and so it begins ...the not so well off will be stuck with terrible broadband speeds on wire while the rich enjoy fibre optic
Anything that means I can finally ditch NTL er.... I mean Virgin Media for good is good news.
I've already replaced their lousy phone package with BT's offering, and their cable TV was replaced with Sky's marvellous package yonks ago.
I can't tell VM to shove their "fibre optic" broadband where the sun doesn't shine because the only ADSL equivalent I can get is state-of-the-ark and reminds me of surfing bulletin boards in the early 90's in terms of speed (or lack thereof).
Even if I can only get 40Mb from BT's new scheme compared to 50Mb from Virgin Media, I'll be happy enough with that and will take great delight in telling VM what I really think of them and their pîss poor customer service.
Ok a few things:
First of all not that long ago you guys said that this wasn't going to happen as shareholders where against it? Seems like a complete U Turn.
Seconds WTF are you talking about interested_party - BT was privatised ages ago moron so how the PUBLIC is funding is beyond me. Or maybe Shareholders and their crazy ideas count as the Public. Are you a shareholder? This isn't some National Iron Sickle Communist Party Network its a Fibre optic network built bye a telecoms company. What the HELL ELSE ARE THEY GONNA DO? I DON'T SEE THE GOD DAMN CONNECTION GET A FREAKING BRAIN MORON