Ofcom sets out plans for UK's full-fibre future

[HEXUS]

It wants BT's competitors to have "simpler, cheaper access" to BT's network.

Read more.

[tomthum]

Its all about money and there all GREEDY BAS---DS SIMPLE

Tom G

[Andy14]

Its all about money and there all GREEDY BAS---DS SIMPLE

Companies Make money. It's why they exist. After a lot of stagnation I've been very pleased with recent news. FTTP & G.Fast look about set to gain good traction.

[Jonatron]

Initial plans to begin a consultation period to tweak access to Openreach's network ... sounds like not a lot happening, at a frustratingly slow pace. I can't see this changing anything.

give everyone the right to request a 10Mbit/s service by 2020

That sounds utterly pointless without more detail than that. Surely there's nothing stopping you requesting things currently?

[virtuo]

Its kind of sad that in 3-4 years time, people will be able to request a minimum speed a squeak faster than ADSL 1. That went up to 8mb in 2000.

[jimbouk]

That sounds utterly pointless without more detail than that. Surely there's nothing stopping you requesting things currently?

Easy as pie where I am. Dear BT, please install 20 x 512kbps SDSL lines. Kind regards.

[peterb]

Its all about money and there all GREEDY BAS---DS SIMPLE

Tom G

Companies Make money. It's why they exist. After a lot of stagnation I've been very pleased with recent news. FTTP & G.Fast look about set to gain good traction.

Companies exist to make money for the shareholders who own the company. If you have a private pension plan, or any form of investment bond, its is likely that you are a shareholder and therefore a part owner of BT - so it might be in your interest that they make money to distribute to shareholders!

[sykobee]

Assuming there is a duct and the cable isn't just buried directly in the ground with that plastic 'utility beneath' warning plastic above it.

Virgin aren't waiting on this, they're using narrow trench diggers to install new cable these days, I doubt they have space for a full duct as well.

[Top_gun]

Companies exist to make money for the shareholders who own the company. If you have a private pension plan, or any form of investment bond, its is likely that you are a shareholder and therefore a part owner of BT - so it might be in your interest that they make money to distribute to shareholders!

Not much of "in your own interest" since all funds will have a wide investment portfolio to hedge against poor sector performances. Each fund is unlikely to hold more than 2% of BT shares.

Modernising our telecom's infrastructure helps a lot more companies to become competitive and efficient which in turn boosts productivity, profits and economy.

I say the problem here is the jobsworth lazy engineer refusing to upgrade the network unless a large cheque is dangled in front of them.

[peterb]

Modernising our telecom's infrastructure helps a lot more companies to become competitive and efficient which in turn boosts productivity, profits and economy.

Which is exactly what BT did when it was denationalised and was able to raise money to compensate for years of chronic under-investment as a nationalised industry.

I say the problem here is the jobsworth lazy engineer refusing to upgrade the network unless a large cheque is dangled in front of them.

Well, you can say what you like, but generally the engineers are the ones working in the labs to develop the technologies to deliver higher speeds, or the next generation networks (BT were big contributors to the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) in the development of IPv6 (Internet Protocol version 6) for example)

The delivery of those technologies tend to be business decisions based within the regulatory framework set out by OFCOM set to provide an acceptable RoI (Return on Investment).

[Ttaskmaster]

10Mbps.... wooo...
So I have to wait at least 3-4 years for "up to 10", while matey a couple miles away has had a consistent 74 for the past 2 years already??!!

[Top_gun]

Which is exactly what BT did when it was denationalised and was able to raise money to compensate for years of chronic under-investment as a nationalised industry.

Really, then why do BT continually hold the UK to ransom over investments in the network?

Well, you can say what you like, but generally the engineers are the ones working in the labs to develop the technologies to deliver higher speeds, or the next generation networks (BT were big contributors to the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) in the development of IPv6 (Internet Protocol version 6) for example)

The delivery of those technologies tend to be business decisions based within the regulatory framework set out by OFCOM set to provide an acceptable RoI (Return on Investment).

You mean scientists working in labs rather than engineers. A great deal of innovations are provided by universities around the world.

[Ttaskmaster]

Really, then why do BT continually hold the UK to ransom over investments in the network?

Same reason we, a global innovative leader in our own industry and a company big on delivering for our customers, also still charge insane money and make the customers foot the bill - Big company serving over a quarter of the country, with lots of assets and staff, both of whom date from as early as pre-privatisation, so very hard to co-ordinate to any degree of publicly-perceptible efficiency (but clearly enough, as things mostly work and you'd darn-well KNOW if they didn't), while also having big foreign investors to whom we must pay staggeringly large dividends.

[MercutioUK]

10Mbps.... wooo...
So I have to wait at least 3-4 years for "up to 10", while matey a couple miles away has had a consistent 74 for the past 2 years already??!!

So when will he get pleasant countryside and fresh air in the immediate vicinity of his residence. OH RIGHT.... never.

You choose where you live based on a number of variables. One should be "is the internet as fast as I want it?". It's rather unreasonable to expect everyone (either via taxes or higher bills) to pick up the tab for supply of faster internet to more remote and much less profitable areas of the UK. I'm sure if you offered to put your hand in pocket for the £xxxxx it would cost to get faster internet laid, BT would be happy to hear from you. Otherwise, I don't believe there's much of a leg to stand on. Internet supply isn't socialist, it's a business. Certain user groups on certain products are already subsidised by others, even gas supply isn't "expected" in some areas and other solutions are instead in place. Why should high speed internet be a god-given right for every citizen, regardless of the cost to others?

[MercutioUK]

Really, then why do BT continually hold the UK to ransom over investments in the network?

Why, when the network was paid for, first by public taxes, pre-privatization, then by private finance, should news international (aka Sky) be able to demand access to it, effectively for free, for Murdoch to use to make private profit?

Giving access to the ducting, cabinets, etc for them to install their own, paid for, equipment is already quite reasonable.

Use a _little_ critical thinking in your discussion.

Short version: what gives a private company an automatic right to another (even ex-public) companies infrastructure when their own goal as a result is motivated by their own profit?

Do you see Murdoch giving away free Satellite? Do you see him allowing channels on his service without paying "rent"? I don't see how this is different.

[Macman]

Really, then why do BT continually hold the UK to ransom over investments in the network?

Because they can!

Think part of the problem is.. we need the provider more than the other way about. If the provider ceased to provide the service at the backbone wouldn't the country be brought to its knees?

Almost every service requires the internet.

Emergency Services?
Banks?
Retail?
Transport?