Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris T
Personally I see no reason why NTL should do this. BT is sitting on a natonwide network that was formerly State owned (i.e., built with our taxes), so it's too damn right they should not be able to abuse the monopoly position we gave them by denying us access to other services via that network. NTL and Telewest networks, on the other hand, are the product of private investment and those who put up the money for it should be allowed to reap the benefits of their investment (assuming their shares are still worth anything, thanks to that rather ill-advised bout of rapid expansion both cablecos went on in the late 90s).
I would have liked to have had a choice of provider down my NTL phone line, of course, but I fully accept the reasons why that would not be fair!
|
Chris, with respect I disagree. The origins of a monopoly are largely an irrelevance and many would argue that taxpayers were shortchanged by the BT privatisation anyway. If a hugely dominant player is allowed to emerge and operate untethered, customers, who ultimately pay those shareholder dividends, will suffer. By giving access to the network - for which a merged NTL/Telewest would no doubt reap access fees - there will be greater choice and the possibility of both better value and service. That may include, for example, the dropping of the requirement to take an NTL phone line as part of the package!
Andy