Thread: Should OFCOM step in?
View Single Post
Old 01-03-2007, 15:52   #10
Stuart
-
 
Stuart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Somewhere
Services: Virgin for TV and Internet, BT for phone
Posts: 26,546
Stuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver bling
Stuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver blingStuart has a lot of silver bling
Re: Should OFCOM step in?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
I'm not that sure that splitting the content from the network providers would work, especially in the longer term. One only has to look at the BT model. With everyone jumping on the LLU bandwagon, BT are left with only a fraction of their network in their control. There is only limited investment in network upgrades.

With Cable or Satellite the companies have incentives to invest in the netowrk or content keeping them both in parity.

Actually, one point to make here. Apart from their editing and uplink facilities, Sky don't own or operate a network. SES own the Astra satellite, and the dishes/boxes are owned by the consumer. This is one reason Sky have always been able to stay ahead of NTL with minimum investment in facilites (not including broadband here).

---------- Post added at 15:52 ---------- Previous post was at 15:49 ----------

I personally don't understand why the government stopped Sky taking their premium services, but ignored the basic services. Surely any protection for competitions sake should apply to ALL channels?
Stuart is offline   Reply With Quote