[Fatec]

Originally Posted by tvtimes

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 ----------

Originally Posted by tvtimes

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

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.

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

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