Quote:
Originally Posted by Morden
Seeing as you dont allow PM's I thought IO would reply about your comments that BT did its investment in its broadband infrastructure whilst a gov owned and therefore was developed with tax payers monney making it different from SKY. (difficult considering that in 1986 that the internet did not really exist and in fact was not invented until Tim Berners Lee developed HTTP in 1990)
In Addition BT did major investment in 2006 Following ref from Wikkipedia. In October 2006 BT confirmed that it would be investing 75% of its total capital spending, put at £10 billion over five years, in its new Internet Protocol (IP) based 21st century network (21CN). Annual savings of £1 billion per annum are expected when the transition to the new network is complete in 2010, with over 50% of its customers transferred by 2008. That month BT took a major step forward when the actual process that will be used to transfer the first customers on to 21CN was successfully tested at Adastral Park in Suffolk.[29]
I just could not be bothered with your line of argument when it was flawed, I just cant stand it it when people bend truths just like corrupt politicians do and dont rely on the factual truths of history.
|
The infrastructure that costs money to deploy is not the backhaul, it's not in the exchanges, it's the access network that connects the consumers premises up to these.
So they're spending £10bn on the 21cn upgrades which aren't touching the last mile.
Think about how much that would be if they were doing that, if they were having to lay cable to everyone of the 60m households in their serviceable area?
That is what people are saying, any amount they invest now is dwarfed by the cost of laying the last mile access network, hence why they aren't rolling out ftth across the country.