It was perfectly robust as a counter argument. The whole premise was that because Virgin's infrastructure was funded by private money there should be no obligation to supply services on a wholesale basis. I pointed out another case where there was a service funded entirely by private money which was required to wholesale. If you want a more relevant one the BT NGA is required to be open access.
I wasn't discussing Sky's content, I was specifically discussing its' EPG. It does not have a monopoly over the Astra network but is required to offer access to its' EPG at regulated rates.
Virgin are receiving some rather pleasant treatment from Ofcom and they know this. They have approximately 49% of the retail telephone, broadband and TV market in their passed areas with the 51% remaining split between all other operators but are not adjudged to have SMP.
Here's a thought - if competition is so healthy in VM passed areas that there is no need for regulation on VM why are BT regulated in the same manner there as everywhere else?
It's because the regulation is not being applied with any granularity or locality beyond the distinction between Hull and the rest of the country. As BT pointed out whether it's the middle of nowhere, a VM passed area with several LLU operators or a brand new apartment block which the operator has installed fibre optics throughout the exact same obligations sit on BT. Virgin are the main beneficiary of this in that their share of all markets drops significantly once taken nationally due to restricted coverage. They go from seriously in danger of SMP to not particularly interesting.
I remember speaking with some guys around the time of Project Octopus. One big concern about that product was covering too much and getting unwanted regulatory attention
It's academic anyway, Europe seems extremely keen on ensuring that Virgin along with other cable companies open their passive infrastructure up. Best get ready to survey those ducts Pierre