Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart
Perhaps because BT's network (I am talking about the lines to houses here, not the backhaul) was largely paid for by the public? While the cable network was built by Virgin's predecessors largely, so while Virgin (previously NTL/Telewest) did not directly pay for it (although they bought the debt), I think they should have some say who uses it.
|
Who paid for Sky's platform, which has a requirement to have competitors on its' EPG at a regulated rate, and is forced to wholesale a selection of its' content at regulated rates?
The whole public private thing is zero defence due to Sky's regulation, amongst other things.
Virgin's business model relies on their total vertical integration. Owning the network and all the services going along it. To lose the retail revenue would cause them some issues as their prices are extremely low. To offer a decent wholesale service on their network the wholesale pricing would probably be very close to the retail one. Wholesale partners are unlikely to tolerate networks spending 9 months a year congested.
Virgin are purely protected because they aren't selling that well in their covered areas. If they covered any more of the UK than they do or were selling better in their covered areas they would be subject to closer scrutiny. As it is thanks to Sky and Freeview they don't have 50% of the TV market in their areas and don't have 50% of the telco or broadband market so don't have Significant Market Power in any market.
They kinda owe Sky for that, perversely if the Sky offering were not so strong VM would be in danger of acquiring sufficient TV customers to be considered to have SMP
