Quote:
Originally Posted by etccarmageddon
why doesn't it matter? the taxpayer sold BT and got billions of dosh and in exchange gave BT to the stock market. you now think BT is a special case compared to Virgin because Virgin was never publicly owned. there is no logic in your argument unless BT is currently still nationalised in which case your argument would be 100% valid.
|
Of course BT was a special case.
Yes BT was privatised, but it was privatised as a monopoloy, with only Mercury as any kind of competition.
Therefore, to de-monopolise (if that is indeed a word) BT had to open up its access network. BT even formed a separate company to manage this, Open Reach.
Now there are lots of telcos/ISPs that have they're own backhaul networks but need to utilise the BT access network to reach the subscribers and therefore give the subscriber the choice.
VM has built a good percentage of it's own Access Network and therefore doesn't need to use BTs in those areas, but does use BT in where it doesn't have its own network.
If VM opens up its network (which it wont) it should be their own choice not OFCOMS directive.
Now other network providors such as Fibrecity are on the scene providing fibre access networks for hire.
Sky are just doing what Sky do, trying to undermine their competition