Quote:
Originally Posted by pippincp
You are now getting there.
You agree that services have gone downhill since the rebranding-and they have.
Other companies would quite rightly buy and reserve X amount of bandwith on the system and pay for the same (Just as premium users do ATM without guarantees)
Who benefits in the end?
1) Customers-they are given choice and get what they pay for.
2) Companies - VM get paid for provisioning and from their own customer base and have the added advantage of bulk wholesale sales.
|
I only said it might be useful. There is always of course the (more likely I suspect) possibility that if it did happen then VM would refuse to provide any QoS guarantees and just continue with the existing architecture prioritising their own traffic.
A company is always going to protect it's own customer base as best as possible over those of competitors that it's forced to carry. (I know suggesting VM might protect our service is a bit far fetched but you get the idea).
At the moment customers do have choice - to most people, broadband is broadband. Those that distinguish (or can distinguish or even care) between ADSL and cable are still in the minority.
The problem with bulk wholesale is the size of investment they'd need to make first to have the capacity to be able to bulk wholesale. Where's that coming from? Regulators forcing them back into Chapter 11 just to try and bring in competition that you could argue isn't necessary given the ADSL market, BTs plans and Sky's fibre to the cabinet ideas?
I have a vague recollection of a discussion on whether opening the cable TV network to competitors may be an idea during the Sky basics discussions - perhaps a thread on opening the broadband network could be interesting.