Cable Broadband Monopoly

cih · 29-01-2007, 01:46

After complaining to Telewest about the new pricing structure I got this reply.

Thank you for your e-mail dated 20 December 2006.

I apologise for any inconvenience and confusion caused. Telewest Broadband aims for the highest standards of customer satisfaction and is disappointed when these are not met.

Our own packages and prices are under constant review to ensure we remain competitive. There are also a number of points to consider in any comparison of Telewest Broadband services, to those of our competitors.

It is important to consider ADSL (Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line) providers limitations due to their reliance upon traditional copper cable technology. Providers with the exemption of Blueyonder can only offer speeds of 'upto' 2MB etc, as signals travelling through copper cables degrade over distance, so your actual download speed is decreased as distance from the local exchange is increased. In addition this also results in an ADSL speed being more severely affected by net traffic at busy times, which will also slow the speed of your connection. Where as I do agree the offer along with other promotions from other providers do seem to provide a cheaper solution, their technology limitations will invariable result in an inferior service.

As Blueyonder operates on a superior Fibre Optic network we have the ability to be able to guarantee our customers their connection speeds and due to the nature of Fibre Optic technology we are virtually unaffected by net traffic within our own network.

Looking to the future our technology will enable us to increase our bandwidth speeds virtually without limit and are currently testing new Broadband connection speeds far in excess of the current market. Whereas our ADSL competitors are now reaching the end of copper cable based speed.

It is because of our investment in technologically advanced networks and infrastructure that our prices may be slightly higher than those of other providers. However, our customers reap the benefits of this investment in the quality of service we can provide.

Does this smack of MONOPOLY and is it time for other broadband suppliers to be allowed to use the cable networks in the same way they use the old BT system. Any thoughts.

scrotnig · 29-01-2007, 01:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by cih

After complaining to Telewest about the new pricing structure I got this reply.

Does this smack of MONOPOLY and is it time for other broadband suppliers to be allowed to use the cable networks in the same way they use the old BT system. Any thoughts.

The cable companies funded and built their networks themselves. Why on God's green earth should they be forced to open this network up to competitors?

The BT network on the other hand was largely built using taxpayers' money and then handed to private investors on a plate. One of the caveats to that back in the eighties was that eventually it would have to be opened up to competition.

Put it another way....if you saved up for years to buy a car, would you think it fair if the government ruled that three days a week you had to let your neighbour use it for free?

Robster · 29-01-2007, 02:40

Well its not a monopoly if you consider it in terms of the services they provide.

Their main competitor for Phone and Broadband is BT. The fact that, as they rightly say BTs network is inherently inferior because of the copper last mile, isnt really NTL:Telewest's problem.

They also have several competitors for TV services including Sky, Freeview, and BT Vision

Whether the competition commission in their infinite wisdom see it the same way is another matter

29-01-2007, 07:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by cih

After complaining to Telewest about the new pricing structure I got this reply.snippitysnippity

snip snip

y thoughts.

Why the hell should they have to. It's was privately funded from day one and should stay that way. If you want no investment, Inferior technology and a seriously bad attitude to customers go to BT otherwise stick with the best and long may it stay that way.

Want to know why there is going to be no upgrade to the last mile on BT.

LLU that's why.

BT will not upgrade the last mile so that some upstart company that has paid nothing in can come along and demand to use it and complain like made if there is any problems on it but pay nothing in to help fix it..

MovedGoalPosts · 29-01-2007, 07:51

I presume that Sky should also not have a monopoly over their satellite TV systems, also privately funded.

The difference with the BT network is that it was publicly funded before the "privatisation" of Thatcher's government.

Ultimately thouhg we do have a choice, the choice may be between fundamentally different technologies, but it is a choice all the same that would not have been there had the private cable and TV networks not been built.

Chrysalis · 29-01-2007, 10:47

Cable has no monopoly, its the only provider with a modern local loop but that doesnt make it a monopoly infact they have strict competition.

Phone - BT is a competitor in every area cable covers.
TV - SKY is a competitor and due to its financial strength and ownership of premium channels has an advantage.
Broadband - ADSL providers are all competitors.

BT on the other hand has a monopoly advantage because in almost all non cabled areas it has what you call a local loop monopoly, this local loop was publicly funded and hasnt had any major investment since BT was privatised. Even LLU lines all pay a portion of income to BT plc.

Sky has a monopoly in some areas where no cable and freeview coverage but this will diminish over time when BT vision becomes more common and freeview coverage increases.

d0pey · 29-01-2007, 11:33

In my opinion I doubt Sky are really concerned about BT Vision. Its only freeview with extras.

TheNorm · 29-01-2007, 11:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by cih

...Does this smack of MONOPOLY and ...

A monopoly has three characteristics:

Quote:

Primary characteristics of a monopoly

Single Seller

...

No close substitutes

Monopoly not only implies a single seller but it also means a single seller producing a commodity having no close substitutes. if the substitutes are available, there will be a competition among the firms. Monopoly means a complete absence of competition. so under monopoly, the commodity has no close substitues.

Price maker

...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

As has been stated, there are several substitutes available, therefore this is not a monopoly.

cih · 29-01-2007, 14:48

I would agree with those who say that Virgin (as it is now called) don't have a Monopoly in the wider sense but for those that require a fast upload / download greater than BT is willing to provide do face no other alternative.

ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£35 for 10mb is far too much.

Does anyone have any prices for other countries?

I appreciate your opinions.

TheNorm · 29-01-2007, 14:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by cih

...but for those that require a fast upload / download ....

Require for what? Medical reasons?

Surely the 10 meg service is aimed at gamers and those who download large files...

Nikesh · 29-01-2007, 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrotnig

The cable companies funded and built their networks themselves. Why on God's green earth should they be forced to open this network up to competitors?

Put it another way....if you saved up for years to buy a car, would you think it fair if the government ruled that three days a week you had to let your neighbour use it for free?

I agree.

cih · 29-01-2007, 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Require for what? Medical reasons?

Surely the 10 meg service is aimed at gamers and those who download large files...

In 5 to 10 years time when 100 meg will be the norm you will realise what a dumb point you have made.

Here is a report to prove the point. It is a little out of date but I don't belive the UK has caught up. http://www.internetnz.net.nz/pubs/ot...adband-markets

scrotnig · 29-01-2007, 21:09

I think there is plenty of competition in the market and things are generally looking pretty good for the consumer.

There are still some areas of concern within telecoms (eg 0870 numbers) but as a general market forces are working well and producing high quality products at affordable prices.

I like my ntl service (TV, phone and broadband) and always have, and with my TV drive coming on Feb 24th it's going to get even better.

I've also got a BT line and I have the pick of a variety of decent call providers for that, all of which give me a great deal. My line rental is with BT - they have just lowered the cost of it. My calls are with Pipex - they have just lowered the cost of it.

No complaints here - I do very well out of a very competitive market and wouldn't want it any other way.

TheNorm · 29-01-2007, 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by cih

...Here is a report to prove the point. It is a little out of date but I don't belive the UK has caught up. http://www.internetnz.net.nz/pubs/ot...adband-markets

This is interesting, but the following is more relevant: BSG Green Paper on 'Predicting UK Future Residential Bandwidth Requirements' http://www.broadbanduk.org/reports/B...ortfor_BSG.pdf

The main "drain" on bandwidth requirements are TV and video downloads - and P2P, of course. A minority of users "require" high bandwidths.

cih · 30-01-2007, 17:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNorm

This is interesting, but the following is more relevant: BSG Green Paper on 'Predicting UK Future Residential Bandwidth Requirements' http://www.broadbanduk.org/reports/B...ortfor_BSG.pdf

Thank you for that. Very interesting.