Quote:
Originally Posted by Morden
What goes around comes around. on one hand SKY were happy to expand their broadband based on piggy backing on BT's national network after OFCOM had previously ruled that BT must open up its network which spent billions and years of work on. If BT had not invested in their network upgrading exchanges, lines, etc, over a number of the last few decades then the only broadband would be Virgins. BT had to allow others access just like SKY will have to now. That access obviously dented BT's monopoly on telecoms just like this will dent SKY's monopoly on sports.
|
On the other hand BT were publically owned and given a natural monopoly at the time of privatisation, Sky have never been publically owned. The reason for BT's regulation is, and has always been, that they were at one time a publically owned company and were provided significant market power as their infrastructure was extremely difficult to replicate.
VM / BT have access to Sky's content, they don't want to pay the rate Sky wants for it though. The two aren't really comparable, Virgin are already delivering Sky's services down their cables as part of their package.
If Ofcom are really so into choice then I await the announcement of the following:
1) Mandatory duct sharing - VM and BT required to rent ducting space for other operators to deploy true fibre optic to homes and businesses at regulated rates.
2) Regulated wholesale access to the VM network.
3) Engagement of the government with a view to removing business rates on fibre optic cabling.
4) Ceasing inserting stupid phrases into code powers (ability to dig) such as requiring a small fibre optic company that's deploying access for a small underserved community to lay extra ducts for the national grid.
After all, I am sure those customers who are unable to get high speeds over DSL but don't want to deal with Virgin Media would appreciate a choice of ISPs over Virgin's HFC network and the prices Virgin previously charged AOL for wholesale access were incredibly expensive and disproportionate to their own costs in running the service as well as their own retail pricing.
The other measures remove barriers to companies to invest and in turn offer us choice too.
Ofcom parading themselves as being 'pro consumer' is laughable. They are pro whatever New Labour tell them to be pro, in this instance they saw Rupert turning from them so thought they'd inconvenience him. If they were actually serious they'd have done so much more than simply demanding that BT sell access to their network cheaply.