Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Just read that the date has been set for the Results, which come around 4 times a year.

Virgin Media will be announcing its Second Quarter 2008 results on Thursday, August 7, 2008 at 8am UK time, 3am ET.

Just for everyone who shows an interest in that stuff.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

Interesting, let's see how the credit crunch is affecting them and how hard they have been hit, my guess is that they won't be posting as good a results as the last few quarters. I expect new subscriptions to be down aswell as over all revenue.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

:welcome: and :LOL:

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

Welcome? He has over 1,000 posts on this forum.:confused:

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

Notification of second quarter 2008 Results?
I will merely say two words, " Severn trent " ;)

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

Don't most quarterly things come around 4 times a year?:D

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

Not in leap years lol

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

it's called being polite? sigh.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

But what was you welcoming him too exactly? If anything he should be welcoming you because he made the thread and joined him:D

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

Revenue may well have dropped as they are having to offer many a retention deal to keep people as people are trying to cut back.

I know they gained a few phone customers back, but surely losing thousands of phone customers per month must have hit quite hard over the last few years, surely they knew if the priced themselves as the dearest phone provider many people would have to move elsewhere either back to a BT line or use a mobile. They have had to try and force a phone line onto people by now offering deals - whereas if they had simply had stayed at offering a cheaper phone service than even BT they wouldn't have kept hold of the many thousands of phone customers.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

The phone is not my main product. Its the broadband i use the most and they make nearly nothing from me on the phone.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

Same here mate

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

I'm tight-fisted and know mobiles are a rip-off, so haven't had a contract mobile for many years. I do have a phone line but was part of a deal to keep me. Most of my calls are on the landline to other landlines as the people I know are tight-fisted too and don't like rip-off mobiles either and are fooled into paying stupid monthly payments for a mobile to get a few hundred 'free' minutes - we have sense. We make many a call in the evening and weekend - so getting the landline and evening and weekend calls package thrown in with the heavily discounted package makes great sense - I was VoIP only for 3 years or so. I also use VoIP for other calls and have a Vodafone mobile with 6 of us on the Vodafone family so we pay £1.17 each per month for 'free' calls between us at any time.

You see when you are bought up in a family that has always done all they can to spend the least they can, it does rub off on you, plus you have more money left for better things / better days.

So maybe it's a combination of poor Virgin Media landline phone costs and people fooled into paying silly money for contract mobiles that hasn't helped, saying that, the vast majority of people who dumped cable phone went back to a BT network landline.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

Take off those goggles and remind yourself that VM are listed in the states, with considerable more regulation than the UK :)

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Reusults
 

They are out now. They made a profit!

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Linky

• OCF of £333m (Q2-07: £315m)

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

They didn't make a profit. They made a £3m profit last quarter and have now posted a £336m loss! But overall every where else looks to be improving and the results certainly do look go considering the current ecomonic climate.

---------- Post added at 12:50 ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 ----------


I find most of my friends and family have virgin mobile phones on the 300 mins and 300 texts for £10 deals. I never use my landline but is part of my package so it's there but i never use it. Whereas i use my mobile a lot as do my friends.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

They seem to be doing alot better everything has increased I aint suprised tho seeing how many people in my team are getting customers taking new services, hopefully they can now start pumping money into the networks and IPTV and get rid of stm and once this network is sorted start getting more HD

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Berkett just said on the webcast, that STM will stay once 50mb comes on line, but that it will be reduced. They're doing the modelling now. But its disappointing that VM won't turn off analogue completely until 2010. Berkett said they could change this schedule if they so wished. I wish they would.

Analysts did ask Berkett why he couldn't switch analogue off sooner, as he said all this bandwith could be used for better things. He said the 200k analogue customers are valuble and migration will not be forced. The truth IMO, is that VM have 6bn debts and can ill afford to do this. Otherwise, analogue would've been axed long ago.

Berkett did mention HD. So perhaps more will be coming "soon".

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Yep, STM limits are changing, though from what i have seen, the change is barely worth while and the STM limits for 50Mbit will still only allow you 20Minutes of full use before capping you down to 10/512, hardly worth it for a premium product.

And upload is *officially* confirmed (and will be to public soon) as 1.5Mbit upload, with the business side getting 2Mbit upload.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

So STM is going on to 50mb but they are gonna lower the timeslots or the limits 20mb - 500mb and then limited I really wouldnt like that lol 20Mb should have around a 30gb limit all day until 9pm then I would be happy

---------- Post added at 16:50 ---------- Previous post was at 16:48 ----------

90% decrease? WTF

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

The time slot will reduce (only by a few hours each way) but the limits will change with this (so you can still get stm'd for upto 15 hours per day), it makes it look fairer when in reality it is not.

50Mbit has -extremely poor- limits for what is supposed to be a premium product, and remember it will also have the daytime STM as well as evening STM, so remember VM saying you can use it to stream HD content? not for longer than 20 minutes, you can't.

Yea..90% decrease, to fit in line with the other STM rules.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

*cries* other speeds have 75% decrease

stupid VM

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Perhaps my maths is out but isn't 50meg down to 10meg an 80% drop rather than 90%?

I can see the logic for regularly breaking the current thresholds with gaming, streaming, etc, but given that 50meg will get close to an 8GB DL DVD sized file in 20 odd minutes, unless you can find an HD streaming service, what other uses are there for regularly breaking the threshold? I can't help but think (again) VM will start to push XXL (or whatever it gets called) based on capacity rather than speed. (OK, that's perhaps slightly OT so to keep it on-topic - this would help push people onto higher packages increasing the ARPU again whlie moving them to the lower cost/maintenance (I believe) DOCSIS 3 network improving overall profitability).

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

That isn't a bad deal really, if you do use them, each and every month.

However using a landline is still a lot cheaper, just not so cheap on Virgin Media. OK if calling a mobile from a landline it can be dear, however if you have a BT landline and use Primus Saver 2 with Penny Mobile (both no monthly fee) then you can call UK mobiles for 20p for up to 20 mins.

Good to see they have added a few phone customers, but still not the numbers they could be if they offered a decent priced phone service.

As we are more or less not really paying for the landline or the calls package and it was installed free, with a discount on the TV and broadband if we stayed a customer, it's beneficial for use to have the phone line - even though we were happily VoIP only using a Linksys PAP2 and having 2 lines which cost less than £10 for around 3 years usage. It's cheaper to use VoIP and landline to call abroad than using the mobile, unless you waste inclusive minutes.

I may have a dig now and then at Virgin Media, but that's only because I want them to improve, want them to do well.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

:clap:

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Not sure what to make of the results. Pretty positive v+ growth and broadband churn, revenues, arpu, debt pretty much constant and all in an environment of financial crisis.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Steady is about right, but certainly not exciting, but that is very much to do with the current climate.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

I would say the results are encouraging considering the ecomonic down turn. People like ITV and BT seem to be hit harder and churn seems to be high with these companies where as virgin is actuall increasing subs a lot more than it is losing them. It is better to lower ARPU than to lose your customers all together. Overall there is nothing to shout about but VM are certainly holding their own considering the hard times placed on them and us customers.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

80% Though its more near 90% with overheads from the severe upload drop, the way they prioritise this means you will never get 10Mbit down.

Ok, what about the fact most house holds now have more than 1 PC? 1 kid playing games, 1 kid streaming youtube, iplayer, itunes, legal p2p services, HD streams, dvd rental/downloads.

Then one person downloading (note that 50Mbit has its own legal HD streaming service)

That limit can be hit within 20Minutes and then the product cannot do what it is advertised to do, multitask and do it fast, 8GB is nothing, xbox360 demos weigh in at 1-4gb, patches for wow weigh in at 3GB, it only takes 1-2 people multitasking for you to hit STM and then the connection becomes useless, its not so much a thing of people downloading illegal content 24/7, it's just a simple fact that file sizes are no longer small and 8GB limit is stupid in this day and age, why assume anyone who is grabbing big files is an illegal downloader?

And sorry, but no, if you're paying for 50Mbit, then you want big files and you want them fast, only rather (stupid?) people would pay for 50Mbit to download an mp3 in a few seconds and not make use of the connection.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Surely you've seen enough of my posts now to realise I certainly don't assume anything above 100meg is illegal? Dig back and you'll find half of my complaints about STM are the limits on the current packages and the other half are that VM provide no useful way for a networked household to work out what it's usage is during that period.

I agree that only the stupid (who deserve what they get) will pay for 50meg just to grab a few MP3s (although you can be sure that's how VM will quote the generosity of the limit).

The HD streaming sounds interesting - and is exactly the thing I referred to as something that would make the limits poor. It is possible that those on their own would break the thresholds. The other things are problems but not ones that will be hit daily - as they can be now, even with the 20meg package.

At least the 10meg left is still a reasonably fast connection -more than can be said for the others. Not the 50meg people are paying for though.

The thing is that TBH, I suspect that VM are more concerned about the quantity of data you receive rather than the speed to get it. As I keep saying, I can't help but feel that VM are trying to push people on to higher speeds when they don't actually need the speed but need the STM allowance that speed gives them.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Just to point out, i actually meant that to be pointed towards VM and not you, sorry about the confusion.

Which is the customers VM want, people who will pay for a top tier product and never use it, they dont want users to actually do anything with their connections.

I'm unsure as to how the HD stream will work, it may be like TiscaliTV where the usage doesnt directly affect the conneciton and wont be counted towards STM but i'm pretty sure its just general streaming using the Net so as you say, it seems rather idiotic to put STM on a package like that, the HD service requires a minimum of 20Mbit to stream efficiently (as per the trials) so users wont be able to use it at all once STM'd. :confused:

If it was done properly yes it's fast enough, though not when you're paying a premium price!!!

Though as noted before, how VM handle the AKPackets and upstream packets means you wont see 10Mbit down and just as with current STM, multitasking will be impossible without crippling the connection.

I personally believe VM are only introducing 50Mbit just to stick their middle finger up at BT/ADSL/ADLS+2 and say "ner ner look at us" aka "small *aherm* syndrome"

And yes, its become blatantly obvious that the STM on the lower tiers has been put in to basically force customers upto a higher tier package just to get the speeds they are paying for.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

In your opinion ;)

I know lots of people who are on the 4Mb (now 10Mb) package, who aren't affected by STM, and who wouldn't dream of "moving up" - they are happy on that. :)

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Just as i know lots of people who are on the 10Mbit package who are affected by STM despite not even being downloaders and would like to get the speed they pay for but cannot afford 20Mbit. ;)

And with the STM limits, anyone not hitting them really shouldnt be on 10Mbit.

Why would you need 10Mbit just to browse and read emails ;)

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

I don't.

I use it for iTunes, COD4, YouTube, and we have 1 PC and 3 laptops, often all being used at the same time (Me on COD4, teenagers doing whatever teenagers do (facebook, uploading/downloading photos, youtube, iPlayer, etc, etc, and SWMBO surfing the intraweeb).

I don't feel the need to download everything that's available, just because I could.;)

10Mb works for me, and for most people I know - I understand that it doesn't work for everyone, and I don't assume that everyone shares my (so far) reasonable experience; but I also don't assume that almost everyone has a bad experience.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

It's not about downloading alot of things though, i think everyone is just angry at the fact if you dare use you're conneciton at full speed for 20 minutes (patches, updates, whatever) then you get classed as an abuser, while the real heavy users just leave their connections running 24/7 (and trust me, since all day STM has come into play, they dont care anymore ...) downloading as much content as possible.:p:

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

I understand their frustration, but not everyone downloads patches, linux distros, and 4GB demos all day, every day......;)

btw, I noticed you ignored the part of my post about 4 people in my house using 10Mb for everyday usage without any negative impact....... :D

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Never said they did, but that's my point, people who rarely download or go over the limit tend to hit it every once in a while and get classed as an abuser, while the real abusers just carry on stealing all the bandwith, this is a point VM have fail to seen and have opted to go for the screw everybody approach rather than sort the real problematic users out, unfair:confused:

For that specific reason above :monkey::p:

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Let's agree to disagree, and hopefully the thread will get back on topic........

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Results are nothing too special. Only things of note are that while Virgin are selling more products they are both selling them to less customers and making less money per customer despite each taking more products than before. A sign of the competitive times I guess.

Apart from that pretty dull, perhaps a touch disappointing as reflected in the drop in share price.

It is worth mentioning that this share price and results cannot be compared directly or even indirectly with BT or BSkyB, both of whom are either in the middle of huge CapEx spends and/or write downs. BT are throwing VM's entire yearly CapEx spend at 21CN alone not including all the other stuff, while Sky experience ongoing pain due to the ITV acquisition and big CapEx spend on Sky Broadband.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

I dont see Virgin will do as bad as people think, they have started to do alittle more but however I can see the next few years will test VM to the limit and then when BT release there uncapped unlimited FTTH service VM could fail

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

They won't fail, they will just have to be more competitive. It will give them the kick up the arse they need because at the moment they are sitting on the best technological advanced infrastructure and they are cruising in 2nd gear instead of fourth. Once BT comes along and offers some real competition virgin will need to get their act together by lowering prices and getting rid of STM. Plus they may need to start offering faster speeds because they are capable of offering some serious speeds once they free up the bandwith. Not only that but once BT rolls our fibre and is forced to Wholesale it to other companies VM is going to have more access to more areas which should in turn improve it's growth.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

The main problem is the debt and it wont get much lower in 4yrs, and Virgin need to get as much miney as they can and invest which they wont do, Virgin need to worry

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Virgin won't invest? Where's 50meg, Setanta sports, extra VOD,new v+, free music ondemand all coming from then? They are investing, making their products stronger so people will join up. Coverage isn't the issue because soon they will be able to reach more and more customers which much less investment and just piggy back off BT.

The debt will get smaller, they pay millions of pounds back every quarter!

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

50Mb - Has harsh stm and isnt using full DOCSIS 3.0 so not much investment there
Setanta Sports - That was a quick fix for losing sky sport news and making customers happy.
VOD - Very messy atm some season have half the shows on there - needs more investment.

Virgin Media could be massive right now but whilst they have STM, limited HD and paying celebs millions for adverts they will be just a company in the middle of sky and bt

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

I'm not going to debate about STM as i agree but as soon as BT come out and offer a non STM'd fibre optic bb offering then VM will have to do the same otherwise people will leave em.

I don't agree about Setanta sports. Setanta sports is a premium offering and they didn't have to sign a £40m quid deal and offer it to their xl customers.
The customers bothered about the loss of Sky one either defected or got a retention offer on their bills for 12 months.

We now have Setanta sports news and Setanta 1,2,3 etc.

I'm happy with VOD, we have iplayer which is great and there is more than enough full series on there. Not all of them are half and there is a lot off one off docs etc. Free music ondemand etc. We have had HBO etc all added since the removal of Sky basics.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

When BT bring out their fibre service, they might not cap the speed like VM do, but they may well cap the amount you can download.

I would rather have STM than a hard cap, however the limits VM have set for STM are way way too low.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

OK, but how many homes, and in what areas will their FTTH pass. That question needs answering before you make a general assumption that VM's customer base will be tested to the limit.

We are talking a few years away, and personally I believe that the amount BT says it needs to spend to realise a fibre network that can compete with VM and possibly H2O seems awfully small. I don't doubt their intent, but I am wondering how much of the announcement was more for the financial markets in what is a very difficult time right now.

Don't get me wrong, if there is ever a serious competition to my very good non STM'd 20Mb service, and its competitive, then VM will have competition as far as I am concerned.

---------- Post added at 18:56 ---------- Previous post was at 18:54 ----------

Yes, we don't, nor does BT know exactly what they may have to do when the bandwidth hogs jump ship to BT.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Incorrect, they have their plans and it isnt going to involve any sort of shaping/throttling (infact, they are getting new hardware in place to handle p2p more effienctly for FTTH).

They have huge network capacity (much, much, much more than VM)

I wouldnt, excuse me but sometimes you know, just sometimes, i actually like to be able to use my connection to its full potential when im actually at home, STM is worse than a hard cap as with STM you can NEVER use it when you're actually there (to what you need it to, at least) only when you are 1)fast asleep or 2)..err, oh yea, since daytime STM there is no number 2. :p:

---------- Post added at 21:05 ---------- Previous post was at 21:00 ----------

They have some BIG plans which are not public knowledge right now, but over the next year or so (when VM apparently offer their *premium* 50Mbit) you'll see more info on what BT are upto (i will note that alot of places are interested in bts fibre rollout and there will be alot more FTTH areas than you think if it can be worked out ok with wholesalers, which will be in talks soon)

Since STM VM already have competition, believe it or not most people can get pretty fast ADSL+2 speeds, while most people are in the 10Mbit range on ADSL2 it is still MUCH better than VM's 20Mbit as you can actually use it when you need it without worrying about having 75% of your connection taken from you, before the merger, VM have no competition as it was pretty much unlimited, although having problems in a few areas (network falling apart) overall customer satisfaction was pretty high, this has changed since the introduction of STM, the people who know about it, well, alot have left (infact, VMs service speedy down here as over 150 people have left just on the last 5 streets since the introduction of STM).

Most of the others i know havent left but have resorted to cloned modems, which these days i just dont care about.



Oh BT know, that's all i'll say for now ;)

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Read in PC Pro today that BT want access to Virgin's cable network, and they may threaten to not get involved if they don't. The government are a bit miffed about GB being low down in the "Superspeed Broadband" league and there was a hint that Oftel may cave in to BT's wishes in order to move up the league table. Sounds like BT may have all sorts of plans in mind to beat VM :-(

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

You make it sound like thats a bad thing? removing the huge monopoly VM has (being that if you want cable, you can only go with VM) would be a good thing!

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

VM does not have a monopoly.

Customers buy "broadband" not the access medium as such there are many "broadband" providers.

If customers make the CHOICE of cable over ADSL then this is more to do with their perception of the technology and this is completely within BT's power to change.

VM has invested several billions of pounds building their network why should others be allowed to benefit from that investment? The main reason the BT network was opened up to OLO's was the fact that the investement was made with public money; this is not the case with VM.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Didn't mean to make it sound like a bad thing, didn't think there was actually an opinion in there :-) Was more a comment on the BT vs Virgin thing this thread had wandered into
Have to agree a bit with tiger, it's kind of like making Tesco's let Asda have a few stalls in their supermarkets, why would anyone want to invest in a private industry if they knew it could be taken off them at the whim of the government ?
The article is here for information
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/212547/b...ins-cable.html

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Although I agree with the fact the choice is among broadband providers rather than among ADSL or cable providers, it's the very fact of being forced to share the investment among your competition that's held back BTs investment in FTTH.

I thought BT's answer to whether they actually want to use VMs network was interesting:
I'm not convinced they really want access but are just trying to muddy the waters. Having VMs network forced open would complicate matters for VM potentially lowering the capital they have available to invest in their own network to compete. If the network isn't forced open then BT have an argument for not opening this portion of their network.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Not really, as has been discussed many times on this forum, BT's access Network (i.e. the last couple of km of copper) was paid for by the tax payer. This is the bit that other operators use.

They very rarely use the BT national fibre optic network that links all the exchanges for their backhaul. In fact many (carphone warehouse, orange,tiscali) use VMs Network. Sky have their own, others will use C&Ws or Thus's Networks.

There is no justification to force VM to open their network.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

... and usually why these Telco's charge more for 0845 and 0870 than BT and why they don't like 03 numbers, they have less break-in and break-out areas so can't as efficiently route route calls, for example someone could call an 0845 number and it might be on the same exchange as the person calling it, BT are able to keep it local, other telcos it might have to go to a central look-up and back out again.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

The justification is that when BT roll FTTP/K this will be new network which is not paid for by the tax payer but private money, yet this network will have to be wholesaled.

Their point is asking why they have to open up this network when the tax payer is not involved while VM can keep theirs closed.

---------- Post added at 11:21 ---------- Previous post was at 11:18 ----------

This goes the other way as well, BT's next generation network when complete will have cost several billion pounds of private money, why should others be allowed to benefit from that investment? The main reason the legacy copper was opened up was as you said because the investment was made with public money, this is not the case with a fibre overlay.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

It wouldn't be a good thing for cable, it would spell the end of cable. They would never pay back their debts if they had loads of companies using their network. VM need the exclusitivity and the customers in order to meet debt repayments. I can't them being forced to open up their network to the likes of BT unless their debt is written off some how. The government would recognise that the company would certainly go under if they don't keep their monopoly and have to keep their debt, it's certainly no where near the same as BT where it was the government who funded their infrastructure in the first place.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Read the reply above and my point is made :)

And i dont care, VM didnt build half the network, they kept buying smaller cable companies out (and this is the reason why some parts of the network is in great shape while others are falling apart and while others are only analogue and will stay that way).

They made sure there was no competition, they got themselfs into debt, do you think i care if they get screwed?

If you want fast broadband, if you want cable (or fibre optic...) then you only have 1 choice of supplier and thats virginmedia, if you dont like their terms then you're completely screwed, some people cannot get adsl so are trapped into cable, that, my friend is a monopoly.

So what about BT's FTTH/N rollout then, they are being forced to go wholesale despite having to spend their own money on it, oh but that's fair because its BT, not precious VM :rolleyes:

From what's been going on lately and how far behind we are with net services...and how bad a condition things are in its looking very likely that VM will be forced to open the network up...

If you're so bothered about VM paying off their debts why dont you go tell them to stop giving bonuses to each other ever year :D

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

BT can scream and shout they want access as much as they like but i can't see it happen given the dire state cable is in.
BT and Sky have asked for access for years and it's never been allowed because the government know it would detrimental to cable.
BT didnt finance their own infrastructure VM did big difference. Why should BT who already hold a monopoly be allowed further monpoly by accessing VM's fibre network.

BT do not have an argument for not offering their fibre as wholesale as it's still run from their copper infrastructure, only the last mile or so will be fibre which means they are still using the same infrastructure financed by the public.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Cable is not in a dire state, just people in VM dont know how to run a company (neil mainly who has destroyed it).
Things are different now, we wasnt so behind back then.

VM bought out other networks for the most part...

Why should VM who have a monopoly over cable/fibre be allowed access to bts FTTH/N (and they do want access...) then? it works both ways you know.

Actually, they have offered fibre in the past, just at high prices which no ISP was interested in (VM use some of bts network btw :rolleyes:)

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

---------- Post added at 15:29 ---------- Previous post was at 14:30 ----------

No your point really isn't made at all because you don't seem to fully understand.
Virgin as a company may not have built the network and lots of little companies did. But all those companies subsequently formed VM years later and all the loans and debts from those companies VM inherited. Therefore VM is responsible for playing back the loans and therefore owns the network which means it hasn't come out of mine and your pockets! Other parts are analogue because VM haven't got the money to pay for the areas to be upgraded as they are lumbered with all the debt from the smaller companies. These areas will be left in the dark ages too unless the government step in and finance for these areas to be upgraded but they won't. Not VM's fault.

I and many others couldn't care if you care less or not. Facts are facts.
What do you mean they made sure there was no competition exactly?
There was lots of little companies who got themselves into so much debt that the shareholders of all these little companies wanted out they took too much risk and it didn't pay off. It happened over and over again until there was 2 left and them two merged to offer a more level playing field with Sky and are now much better placed to start paying that debt back which they are doing. You say VM doesn't have competition? So what is BT, Sky, Carphone warehouse, small world cable etc then? Yeah they got themselves into debt and thank god they did because otherwise everyone would be stuck with ADSL exchange restricted Broadband a much poorer service than Fibre.

You don't have a clue what a monopoly is then. Sky has monopoly on TV because they offer tv to everyone and have no competition in the majority of their areas. VM may have fibre optic bb but that does make them have a monpoly as they have competition in their markets. People have the choice of different bb suppliers whether it's fibre or not. A monopolistic company also abuses it's postition in the market they dominate. VM does not dominate the bb market as they have lots of competition and they have to keep competitive and keep prices down in order to compete as their customers have the choice to go elsewhere.
http://tutor2u.net/economics/gcse/re...s_monopoly.htm
That link should help you understand what a true business monopoly is.

What do you mean most people can't get ADSL? Anyone can get ADSL!

Precious VM? That is truly pathetic show some maturity or there is no point in debating with you. What's wrong can't you stand people having a different opinion to you?

I think you need to do some more research into what BT are ACTUALLY proposing my friend. They wil still be using their old network as a back bone and are only invested from the cab to the customers home! Therefore they are fibring up the last tiny preportion of the network and still using the network we all paid for! Completely different scenario to VM:rolleyes:

If you're so bothered about VM paying off their debts why dont you go tell them to stop giving bonuses to each other ever year :D [/QUOTE]
They are paying their debts, millions every quarter. They rightfully should be getting bonuses if they are hitting their targets set. Although in places i think their money could be better spent.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Virgin Media arent in a dire state look at the Q2 results, only problem is they dont invest enough in any service

I also do think as Trax does bring alot of info regarding VM which most turns out to be true, he does have a hatered towards VM maybe because he knows more than the average joe

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Actually, you're incorrect, those areas are still analogue not because VM cannot afford to upgrade it, but because they dont see it as worth it.

Yes it is VMs fault, its nothing to do with debt.

And you're facts are wrong.

I'm trying to work out if that reply is serious, smallworldmedia only operates in scotland, hardly competition there.

VM used their monopoly to buy out (or make other companies go under) other cable companies and spend silly prices on then to make sure the companies would accept the offer, VM made themselfs get in debt by handling money bandly and opting for extremely cheap installs of their network, why should i care if they got in debt because of that?

BT, Sky and everyone else is ADSL1/2, you cannot compare them because the network is completely different and cannot offer the speeds that cable can, only when bt roll out fibre can they be competition against VM, H2o is only in one area at the moment as well, so also not competition.

Thank god they did? no i think you'll find if they hadnt bought everyone out we'd have quite a range of cable suppliers to choose from and we'd have healthy competition, as VM have no competition they can screw customers over as much as they like and get away with it, why? because there isnt anything better, because they have the monopoly over cable...

What is freesat then? what is cable then? you realise freesat itself has been around for years, sky do not have a monopoly on tv, you can get the free channels with a dish and a reciever, you can get sky channels from sky or vm or indeed freeview using topuptv, thats monopoly, is it?

Ok, VM do NOT have fibre optic broadband, they only have fibre to the node then its coax/copper to you, if you want to go down that path you can say BT is fibre optic as they are fibre upto a point the copper to you :rolleyes:

Again, if you want cable, you can only get virginmedia, dont you get that? there is no other companies at all, that's a monopoly, infact, you contradict yourself here, refer to you're point about sky, the same applies to VM here, except, as i said, you CANNOT get cable from anyone else, monopoly.

VM doesnt abuse and dominate the cable market? oh really...this all day traffic management while charging high prices just because they can must be my pure imagination.

And again, alot of people are 3-5KM away from the exchange, meaning they cant connect to ADSL at all, new builds are the same as well, you cannot compare an ADSL 512k-2Mbit connection next to VMs cable 2/10/20, It's an unfair comparison.

I have no issues with someone having a difference of opinion but the simple fact is you're being a fanboy here, your not taking into account both sides, you think its OK for BT to have to be forced to wholesale their FTTH/N even though they are paying for it yet u think its not OK for VM to be forced to open up their network, double standards there.

Only half correct, new builds will get FTTH, other areas will get FTTC, this will offer speeds of 20-60Mbit, what you should note however that this is only a measure till they can afford full FTTH to all areas, do you work for BT? you have no idea what their plans are, if you did u'd know they are in talks with ISPs over being able to offer wholesale FTTH to everybody provided ISP's cough up some money as well.

And again, VM want access to BT's network when its done so they can offer Cable BB/TV to areas where they couldnt before, do you think thats fair? or you playing the double standard thing again? :rolleyes:


They are paying their debts, millions every quarter. They rightfully should be getting bonuses if they are hitting their targets set. Although in places i think their money could be better spent.[/QUOTE]

Yea, they are paying their debts...too bad they are paying them by oversubscribing the network then traffic managing customers all day but blame it on "heavy" customers (which is a lie within itself, how poor is the network if it cant even handle just 1% of users using their connections at full capacity for more than 20 minutes at a time?).

Not a sign of a good company is it

---------- Post added at 15:49 ---------- Previous post was at 15:46 ----------

Exactly.

I dont have a hatred towards VM in general, infact they have some very nice honest and hard working staff there.

It's the people in power (neil, alex) who have ruined the company beyond belief.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

They are in a dire state though, they have £6bn worth of debt. Their the worst off in their sector. Neil has mainly destroyed it? NOOOOO, since Neil Berkett took over it the company has posted the best quarters cable ever has in it's history! Record people signing up, cable is the fastest growing paytv and bb business in it's marketable areas.

Things are no different! They are still lumbered with billions of debt that they won't be able to pay back for the forseeable future and were are talking decades. They still have limited access to the country unlike their competition.


Yeah they did and inherited the debt that goes along with it.

No it doesn't work both ways though, VM own their network. BT don't own theirs the UK tax payer does. I have already explained why i won't do it again.

Yeah they offered it out and no one was interested because they were ripping people off. BT have also stated to ofcom that they won't bother investing unless they can charge high prices to see high return. BT want to make the investment worth their while whilst all the time still running from the head end to the cab of the UK taxpayers financed network.

Yeah VM use BTs network because everyone in the country contributed to paying for it. Therefore those that are outside of VM on net network have the choice of opting for ADSL bb. VM paid for their own network and therefore don't have to let everyone else use it. :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 15:58 ---------- Previous post was at 15:56 ----------

Yeah Quarter 2 was their lowest performance yet. They posted an operating profit last quarter and now have posted a £336m loss!

He has a hatred towards vm because he knows more than most? Yeah ok then :rolleyes:

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

I think you'll find that is incorrect, if you look at their stats you'll find they have more customers signing up for multiple things (quad play?) but at reduced prices (retentions), they have quite alot of people disconnecting.

So he is ruining the company, sure more people signing up for combos but at retention pricing, they aint actually making all that much profit.

STM was supposed to be a stop gap measure till they could upgrade the network properly, Neil has decided to keep it permanently as it saves them bandwith and they dont have to do the upgrades actually required but still allows them to sign more customers up, yes, can see how he has improved the company :rolleyes:


Things are different, we are starting to get majorly behind with speeds, even america is now ahead of us with even a poor isp like comcast (like our tiscali service wise) offering 16/2 20/4 and 50/10 packages (50/10 coming soon).

Then there is fios who offer upto 50/50.

We used to be quite far ahead with BB speeds, things are different now, we are slipping behind and you can hardly class VM offering 50Mbit as moving forward when if you have the audicity to use it, they cap you and take it off you.

Point? that what VM wanting to have a monopoly and make sure you couldnt go anywhere else for cable.

Actually, again, you're incorrect, the tax payer owned it when it was all copper, you do realise over the years BT have upgraded (from their own pocket i might add) most of their network to fibre? and its now only copper from the exchang to you that's the problem, and now they are paying up to offer fibre even further, out of their own pockets, i might add.

So yes, it does.

Again, incorrect, it wasnt that ISP's were not interested, it was the fact people in this country expect everything for free and dont want to pay for bandwith (thus we have the likes of tiscali and stupid price wars that have set off), ISP's decided it wasnt worth it as they wouldnt be able to make any profit (again, down to users not wanting to cough up) then there was the fact that isps decided that users would never want those speeds, you can hardly blame that on BT, they were going to charge less for wholesale of their fibre than they do now for crummy adsl1/2, yea, so, whats you're point? bandwith isnt cheat, rolling that sort of network out isnt cheap either, why shouldnt they be able to charge realistic prices for an uncapped/unshaped true fibre connection? its called being realistic.

As to your last statement, read my earlier reply about talks with ISPs to offer full FTTH to everyone, you'll hear about that over the next year or so if isps agree.

And what if they dont want ADSL? what if they want cable? oops, cant, only VM have cable and refuse to offer it to the countryside.

BT have paid for their own network (all the fibre and the new fibre extention) plus the network haul upgrades, the uplinks, do you not take this into consideration? you have any idea how much it costs to upgrade network link ups? BT coughed that up, BT isnt the bad company you make it out to be, they have problems like every companies does but still.

---------- Post added at 16:08 ---------- Previous post was at 16:06 ----------


Q2 Results were bad, again, go look back, they aint exactly making new customers, they are taking more existing customers and having them sign up for multiple packages with retention deals, thats hardly a good thing for a business.

Refer to my earlier post about hatred towards VM, and yes i know more than most and i like to share that information here.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Yes it is VMs fault, its nothing to do with debt.

:rolleyes:You really do not have a clue do you whatsoever? How can they upgrade it considering the debt that they are in! They are upgraded some areas slowly where they can afford too. Where's your proof where VM say it isn't worth it? Source please?:o:



No my facts are right you're wrong sorry to break it to you:)



Makes no difference they are still competition whether it's in Scotland or not.
The reply was serious, funny how you only pointed the smallest company of the ones i mentioned hey?

No, the larger cable companies bought out smaller struggling companies that were going under, if they hadn't then those areas that were fibred up would have gone to waste as no company would be using the infrastructure. Again do some proper research. Like i said i don't care what you care about. It's not about you.

No you can compare them because VM do not have a monpoly as they have competition whether it's ADSL or not. If they have competition in any form then there is no monopoly. Fact is their are others companies offering BB where VM does forcing VM to compete for customers therefore no monopoly otherwise all people in VM areas who wanted bb would have to have VM. FACT.

Yeah thank god they did because now we have a massive company with lots more money investing into things like 50meg BB, VOD, Setanta, free music ondemand and iplayer. Smaller companies wouldn't have been able to afford to do that. Once again if we had loads of small companies the majority wouldn't be here now as they were debt ridden to the point where they were going bankrupt. VM isn't screwing customers, it's invested millions in to it's offering and customers are receiving free upgrades, plus 50meg being launched etc.



Sky operates in PAYTV! :rolleyes:Freesat is not pay tv!:rolleyes: God mate you do make me laugh:D
Is VM available to the whole country like Sky? No, So Sky has the monopoly in paytv:D

No, they have a fibre infrastructure from the head end all the way to the cabinet and then it's coax from there which means there is no signal degrading, which may i add again cable paid for themselves. BT however have a mostly copper network which the uk tax payer paid for and now want to add a little fibre to it at the end from the cab to the customers home. Big difference! It's still a network paid for by the public! Why can't you grasp that? Take your tinted spec off please:D


FFS:D If you want BROADBAND you have a choice! That's not a monopoly! VM does not have a monopoly because there is choice! With Sky they have no competition from cable in over 50% of the country! Therefore they are the only PAYTv provider which means they have a monopoly! It's not about the way it's delivered!

No they don't abuse their customers. The customers affected are the ones that abuse their connections. If there wasn't so many pirated modems and boxes clogging up VM's bandwith then they wouldn't need to stm their customers would they? By the way it isn't all day actually;) They charge high prices (your opinion) because they offer a reliable bb connection much better than that of ADSL. Are you forgetting about the free upgrade for their customers? That's really abusing the postition isn't it?



Not it's not an unfair comparison. VM still have competition with ADSL and ADSL+2. Those companies offering ADSL bb are still operating in VM areas causing competition and resulting in no monopoly;)

Oh look more abuse i wondered how long it would take you to come out with that word and start getting personal, i think someone is getting a little rialled:) I'm no fanboy thank you very much and i don't accuse you of being one either. We are having a simple and what i thought was an adult debate but it seems i was sadly mistaken. If you are going to post nonsense about VM having a monopoly etc then you need to expect people to not agree with you and air their views. I am taking into account both sides and you are clearly not as you clearly have little knowledge of what BT preposed plans for their fibre roll outs are. You also seem to have little knowledge on VM's affairs and why opening up their network is no go area.

What's this about double standards again? It's very fair as i have said a hundred times now the government own BT's network as it was paid by the UK tax payer!!!!!!!!!!!!! that is why they are forced to offer the network to VM!

I'm gonna go now. I'm not debating this any further because you are looking at it from one prospective only. :rolleyes:

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Thank god this debate is over

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

This thread is interesting. In the same thread we've had tvtimes say how well VM are doing, fantastic quarters, loads of investment in new services, and then saying what a dire state they are in, must be protected from network being opened up else they'll fold, etc.

Just to make a point the Openreach run copper plant was originally built by the taxpayer however it was then sold, not given for free. Since privatisation BT have spent tens of billions on network upgrades and continue to spend multi-billions a year, presently on replacing the legacy switch network (which by the way was funded privately, there were no digital exchanges pre-privatisation as the Govt just leeched the money BT made rather than investing) with an all-IP network.

BT PLC have paid for that copper plany many times over by now. They aren't demanding a high return on any fibre investment they are quoted as wanting a 'reasonable' one whatever that might be and are discussing terms with Ofcom. For anyone to say that they want a high return you are either privvy to these discussions or wrong. Given that no-one else has shown willingness to make this investment and the current economic climate I would say that some reasonable expectation of a return on the investment is pretty wise. If BT just threw fibre at the entire country and let Ofcom do as they pleased with it, and some ISPs have very unreasonable demands of BT's fibre network including wanting every home to have a fibre from the exchange and the ability to unbundle each fibre to their own switch which doesn't happen anywhere in the world, their board would be fired immediately.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

What about Birmingham Cable? Telewest took them over, were they going under?

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

ntl and Telewest were both chasing after Cable and Wireless Consumer Co in a huge way, it was the 2nd biggest cable operator at the time and both offered 10 figure sums for them. They were in less debt than either ntl or Telewest.

Dealing with a few earlier points, ntl said that they would upgrade analogue areas where it was financially viable, some areas are or have been switched off as they are not economically viable.

Erm so BT are going to be running copper to cabinets then fibre from there? No. BT will be installing Fibre from exchange to cabinet mounted DSLAMs or all the way to customers. They will be replacing everything bar that last 400m. Also it's a network built by the public and sold to shareholders! Why can't you grasp that BT's sale was just that and they weren't gifted said network, or that BT have spent more on getting that network in order than the entire cost of VM's network with change? The ATM network, most of the national fibre network, the IP network, even the digital voice switching network were all installed post privatisation. BT are spending £3 billion a year on 21CN, but that's nothing right as they will be using 400m of copper the government sold to the private sector which will connect to BT PLC purchased DSLAMs, then BT PLC purchased fibre to a BT PLC purchased router and onto the BT PLC purchased IP backbone running with BT PLC purchased routers and switches connected by BT PLC laid transmission network.

I could waste my time taking your opinions which you pass off as facts apart tvtimes but really no point. If they are facts in your world they'll remain so :)

Oh actually one quick thing about analogue overbuilding. Look how much Virgin spend on advertising. The entire ntl Ex-Videotron London analogue to digital upgrade cost sub-50 million. Is it really that bank breaking? Answer is no but Virgin Media spend a terribly low amount on network overbuild compared with other cablecos.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Uhhh read it again and digest properly. They are in the best position they have ever been for a cable company and previous to this quarter posted great statistics. This last quarter because of the write off virgin mobile it was a poor quarter.:)

---------- Post added at 17:58 ---------- Previous post was at 17:44 ----------

No please do. I want to hear you "facts" please because i would like a good laugh i really would. Some of you are so dilluded you really are.
BT got governemtn funding FACT!
Cable funded itself by loans which they are paying back! FACT! How is any of that not facts?! Come please do tell;)

As for revenue that goes to all different aspects of the business and they wouldn't put all their revenue from their tv channels into upgrading analogue areas. It goes to all different things like investing more into ondemand etc in order to help customer growth.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

VOD is great but stm and trying to stick two fingers to adsl providers isnt right they need to invest heavily into the broadband network to make it a real hero product

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

Don't you need revenue to do that?

Most posters on here seem to think that VM are too expensive - seem to be mutually exclusive requirements.

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

They have money but choose to pay samuel L jackson £20 million for a adverts and £40 million to uma

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

erm, made up figures, perhaps - The total VM ad bill was £70million last year, compared to BSkyB's £160million.

Link

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

That just makes no sense. 'best position they have ever been for a cable company and previous posted great statistics' is to me pretty equivocal. Surely in such a fantastic position they can afford a few quid for network overbuild?

That you were so upset you couldn't spell deluded is funny. I never said that BT did not get any government funding, though BT PLC didn't, I pointed out that BT's NGN is not receiving any government funding and that since privatisation BT PLC's CapEx has dwarfed the intiial government spend. The government made a lot of money per year out of BT by the way.

That doesn't really make sense either. Of course monies are spread around. Telephony was subsidising other parts of the business for quite some time. I'd have thought overbuilding so that customers who only had access to a few analogue channels can take full triple play would have been pretty good for growing customer base. Can I remind you that you said that it was all about them not being able to afford to do the overbuild, nothing at all to do with choosing not to which is what you are saying now.

I've no idea what you're trying to say with your post, it either makes little sense, states the obvious, or doesn't have any bearing on what I posted and you're contradicting yourself over and over in this thread :confused:

Re: Notification of Second Quarter 2008 Results
 

you keep going on about BT investing in the NGN etc, bla bla bla and how because of this its not been paid for by the tax payer etc.

It dosn't matter who paid for the equipment whether its copper or fiber. The Tax payer still paid for the treches to be dug and the ducting to be laid which these cables run through. Its the actual laying of the ducting that costs the most and this is where BT have the advantage. Yes its going to cost them to replace the copper with fiber but they will use the exising ducting meaning not having to dig up roads etc.