Will virgin tap into bt?

[OLD BOY]

With the rollout of fibre optic cable throughout the country, does anyone know if VM might piggy back onto BT's cable network to serve areas not currently receiving full Virgin services?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

With the rollout of fibre optic cable throughout the country, does anyone know if VM might piggy back onto BT's cable network to serve areas not currently receiving full Virgin services?

That would be a no.

It was considered last year. VM's parent company cancelled the project at quite a late stage in favour of expansion of the VM cable network.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

It was considered last year.

Two years ago I think it was last mentioned on here?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

That would be a no.

It was considered last year. VM's parent company cancelled the project at quite a late stage in favour of expansion of the VM cable network.

Thank you for this. I am aware that Virgin are expanding into new areas, but this will still leave a lot of people not served at all. I just wondered whether they would be likely to 'infill' using BT fibre optic cables.

Telegraph wires were proposed a while ago now but I've not heard any more about this.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Thank you for this. I am aware that Virgin are expanding into new areas, but this will still leave a lot of people not served at all. I just wondered whether they would be likely to 'infill' using BT fibre optic cables.

Again, no.

Telegraph wires were proposed a while ago now but I've not heard any more about this.

BT do not have any fibre optic telegraph wires.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Telegraph wires were proposed a while ago now but I've not heard any more about this.

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

BT do not have any fibre optic telegraph wires.

Maybe it was this ? http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4...aph-poles.html

[qasdfdsaq]

Possibly, but that's a method for VM to make extending their own network cheaper, and nothing to do with BT fibre

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Two years ago I think it was last mentioned on here?

Yep, my mistake.

---------- Post added at 15:41 ---------- Previous post was at 15:21 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Thank you for this. I am aware that Virgin are expanding into new areas, but this will still leave a lot of people not served at all.

Virgin don't really care about those left unserved for right now beyond the Project Lightning areas. They don't seem interested in using BT's infrastructure in any way. They have done trials and haven't progressed them to deliver products for several reasons.

They have recently successfully trialled new ways to deploy their cable and full fat fibre optic networks and will do this where the financial case makes sense. That isn't everywhere, but then BT only did 2/3rds of the country out of their own pocket. VM will have greater coverage than BT's commercial FTTC rollout did, and at considerably higher cost.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

That would be a no.

It was considered last year. VM's parent company cancelled the project at quite a late stage in favour of expansion of the VM cable network.

Indeed, it was the project ( actually called project fibre) to basically just become another BT reseller same as everyone else. It was quite rightly cancelled as it meant we would be no different than everyone else in this areas. Expanding the cable footprint was/is definitely the right move.


However I think the question is more to with the recent ofcom announcement where it is considering making BT open up its fibre backhaul network.

This would not make difference to VM.

VM already has a very extensive national fibre network, but it doesn't mean it can or will build out from it to new areas.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Pierre

VM already has a very extensive national fibre network, but it doesn't mean it can or will build out from it to new areas.

Indeed. I would imagine proximity to existing backhaul is just one consideration. How close the area is to existing network, whether the hubsite has capacity, the headend if the hubsite doesn't have CMTS / CCAP, and simple civils costs and expected uptake.

Connecting up orphan plant I'm sure helps with the maths too. The £750 per premises passed all in allocated to Lightning is generous.

The BT dark fibre stuff is I suspect more about mobile mast backhaul, with the EE merger likely to go through.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Indeed, it was the project ( actually called project fibre) to basically just become another BT reseller same as everyone else. It was quite rightly cancelled as it meant we would be no different than everyone else in this areas. Expanding the cable footprint was/is definitely the right move.

There is still space for differentiation though.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

There is still space for differentiation though.

Yes, but not enough to give a real different proposition to the consumer.

VM can offer something that is totally diverse from the BT/ et al. One. And I think the consumer, lucky enough to have the choice, is better for it.

And, obviously, if you're lucky enough to be able to access services from another party so much the better.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

There is still space for differentiation though.

I think the problem is that the key differentiator Virgin currently has - broadband speed - would be the same as anyone else. Virgin could potentially offer IPTV that would thrash the competition since they already have those deals set up but I'm not sure that'd be worth the tradeoff in confusing customers between Virgin Cable and what used to be called Virgin national. I knew quite a few people on Virgin national who had no idea that it wasn't fibre-optic.

If they wanted to have another "national" style service, they'd be far better off doing it under another brand (like BT and PlusNet), but is it worth it? I'm guessing they've decided that they're better off spending their money on fibre.

[snowey]

Originally Posted by Kushan

I think the problem is that the key differentiator Virgin currently has - broadband speed - would be the same as anyone else. Virgin could potentially offer IPTV that would thrash the competition since they already have those deals set up but I'm not sure that'd be worth the tradeoff in confusing customers between Virgin Cable and what used to be called Virgin national. I knew quite a few people on Virgin national who had no idea that it wasn't fibre-optic.

If they wanted to have another "national" style service, they'd be far better off doing it under another brand (like BT and PlusNet), but is it worth it? I'm guessing they've decided that they're better off spending their money on fibre.

spot on

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Kushan

I think the problem is that the key differentiator Virgin currently has - broadband speed - would be the same as anyone else. Virgin could potentially offer IPTV that would thrash the competition since they already have those deals set up but I'm not sure that'd be worth the tradeoff in confusing customers between Virgin Cable and what used to be called Virgin national. I knew quite a few people on Virgin national who had no idea that it wasn't fibre-optic.

If they wanted to have another "national" style service, they'd be far better off doing it under another brand (like BT and PlusNet), but is it worth it? I'm guessing they've decided that they're better off spending their money on fibre.

Totally agree. I always thought that rebranding Virgin National to NTL or similar and offering a TalkTalk/PlusNet price point could be a winner. BT with PlusNet and Sky with Now TV both tap the lower pay TV market successfully but VM does not.
One possible expansion of the VM network could be seen if Liberty Global and Vodafone collaborate as mentioned in this recent news article. http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2015/...vodafone-deal/