Broadband firms protest against BT's monopoly position

[shaithis]

Give me 2 meg with proper support and someone who will fix the problems over 80meg, we might fix it in 2 weeks.

It all depends if you actually rely on it or not.

You can have both with Zen

Looking at my last 3 months usage on my router shows 1.5TB in and 600GB out. 2Mbps isn't enough for many people these days

[tomthum]

If O2 sells to B.T> then I for one would change my mobile supplier B.T. is a Total rip of company

[Savas]

The only solution for customers is to stop going with BT.

[peterb]

I

Yet to be perfectly blunt, the actual telephone service has not really changed in the last 50 years other than add a few extra numbers to dialing codes, add extra capacity once in a while and change the numbers which relate to premium calls to confuse everyone...it's still run on copper wire which hasn't really been maintained.

To be perfectly blunt, that is a load of tosh! 50 years ago the PSTN was all analogue, and mechanically switched. Shared party lines were not uncommon, and international direct dialling was only just becoming widespread. All aspects of the telephone system, including the telephone itself, was rented from the then GPO, who were the only service provider. In real terms, the telephone service was considerably more expensive than it is today. All calls were charged on a time basis, with calls made from 9am to 1 pm charged at a premium rate.

The backbone of the telephone system today is fibre, and over the last 10 tears this has migrated from a switched circuit network to an IP routed network, so to say that it is unchanged for 50 year is absolute rubbish! The real changes started after BT was de-nationalised, with the introduction of electronic exchanges, and modernising the network, which had suffered (like most nationalised industries) from under investment and poor management.

[shaithis]

Regardless of what BT has done....in 11 of the last 12 years BT has posted post-tax profits of between 1 and 3 billion UKP.

Yet they are still holding us hostage to a £17/month line rental that most of us do not want, we only want the broadband.

The only solution for customers is to stop going with BT.

They own the infrastructure and therefore if you don't go with virgin fibre (something I am NEVER going to do again), you are going to be reliant on the BT infrastructure to some degree.....

[peterb]

Regardless of what BT has done....in 11 of the last 12 years BT has posted post-tax profits of between 1 and 3 billion UKP.

Yet they are still holding us hostage to a £17/month line rental that most of us do not want, we only want the broadband.

The line rental covers the cost of maintenance of the line that provides a broadband service and telephony service. Regardless of the telephony facility, you still need a line - so that will be a charge whether it is termed as telephone line or broadband line.

[shaithis]

The line rental covers the cost of maintenance of the line that provides a broadband service and telephony service. Regardless of the telephony facility, you still need a line - so that will be a charge whether it is termed as telephone line or broadband line.

But £17 per month? Most people pay less than that for the broadband that goes down the line....it's like your road tax costing more than your car.

[crossy]

The line rental covers the cost of maintenance of the line that provides a broadband service and telephony service. Regardless of the telephony facility, you still need a line - so that will be a charge whether it is termed as telephone line or broadband line.

Of course, Virgin Media cable customers don't have that restriction. Shame that there's not more companies doing cable broadband - I like it so much better than the ADSL based ones.

[peterb]

Of course, Virgin Media cable customers don't have that restriction. Shame that there's not more companies doing cable broadband - I like it so much better than the ADSL based ones.

But you still need a line, and the technology for delivering a digital signal over a cable, whether it is twisted pair or co-ax is essentially the same. And that line and the equipment providing the service still needs to be maintained. (The technology for fibre is somewhat different, although there is still a maintenance overhead)

[crossy]

But you still need a line, and the technology for delivering a digital signal over a cable, whether it is twisted pair or co-ax is essentially the same. And that line and the equipment providing the service still needs to be maintained. (The technology for fibre is somewhat different, although there is still a maintenance overhead)

You're missing the point I was trying to make. Shaithis' complaint was that "Yet they are still holding us hostage to a £17/month line rental that most of us do not want, we only want the broadband." - the "line rental" in question being for a landline. What I'm saying is that Virgin are quite happy to sell me a broadband line with no phone - it's network cable, not a phone line.

And the £25+/month Virgin charge is therefore a combined cost for providing the broadband service - and that's it. So if you decide that you don't want/need a landline then it's all good.