Hmm - not sure that counts, as presumably all Sky have to do if one of their client companies gets really competitive is hike the price or pull the scheme. The key is regulatory control to prevent such anti-competitive measures.
Quote:
|
Just becuase a company is not financially sound (which is very much a situation of their own making) is not a reason to not regulate.
|
The only reason to regulate is to *increase* competition, if the effect is to reduce competition by making ntl/TW spend a fortune opening their network, it has the opposite effect. That, to my mind, is a perfectly sound reason not to regulate. You don't find people clamouring for Scottish crofters or East End allotment holders to open up their land for free access.
Oh, and BT, compared to ntl/TW, have had the great benefit of being the incumbent monopoly telephone provider, makes profits in nine figures every year, didn't go bust building its network, wasn't saddled by debt and has a colossal income. If ntl/TW get to being remotely in the same position, go ahead and open it up (it's more people who'll employ me for a start
).