Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet
BT aren't asking for access to the active cable network just the ducting so the rest of this section is moot..
|
Why would BT want access to VM's ducts, but not their CATV network, when they have telephone poles which cover the entire country? BT is the only company with 100% coverage to UK homes.
It's not clear what BT are asking for, if at all. Only what articles quoting them as saying. It seems to me that BT just want to cause waves for VM.
Quote:
|
No - the agreement is BT to allow access to its' poles and ducts. BT are already obliged to provide access to any next generation access network on a bitstream basis.
|
What agreement are you referring to? If such an agreement exists why are the government consulting about opening up access to BT's poles? - I provided the link to the consultation document earlier.
Quote:
|
Yes - however 50% of FTTC investment will be reused in FTTH/P. There have been for years products to allow BT's competitors to install their own equipment in cabinets and it has been done. It's called subloop unbundling and has been around as long as local loop unbundling.
|
Please name an area where this subloop unbundling has happened which allows BT's competitors to offer fibre services to homes??
How can all this stuff been around for years when BT have only just begun a programme to install FTTC to some areas? How do you know 50% of the FTTC investment will be reused for FTTH, as good as it sounds? How can BT's competitors offer FFTH services when they don't have access to the poles? Although you seem to think they do.
Quote:
|
Not going to happen, and in any event nothing convenient about it. Most of the pension liabilities are with Openreach and it's a bureaucratic pain in the backside to get things done with but necessary.
|
Very good point. Seems a good reason why BT would be quite happy to offload Openreach onto the State.
Quote:
Conservatives are about smaller government and free markets, not enlarging government through nationalisation and interfering in free markets. To do so would be a bizarre and most un-conservative act.
EDIT: Plus, simply, who pays? We have a lot more pressing things to do with the tax payer's money than fit fibre to Farmer Giles' barn.
|
Indeed, but that is the issue. Whether it be the farmer's barn or Mrs McBride in the Outer Hebrides, nobody wants to pay. And I think BT have a strong case to say why should they (under the universal service obligation) pay for faster broadband to these areas when competitors are under no such obligations.