Will virgin tap into bt?

[Ignitionnet]

VM built the infrastructure to deploy using BT's FTTC network, Liberty pulled it.

Liberty have no interest in expanding using BT's access network. Vodafone have the Cable and Wireless LLU network however by the time VM have completed the Lightning build they'll pass the vast majority of that footprint too.

Vodafone's LLU network passes about 16 million premises. VM's network will pass about 17 million premises once Lightning is done.

The 'budget' end of the market is seriously congested now. There's no real value in someone like VM joining in. TalkTalk have the benefit of scale, a big customer base, and a big LLU network; Plusnet have the benefits of being part of BT; Sky have their DBS TV and use phone and broadband as a retention tool for that.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

The 'budget' end of the market is seriously congested now.

True, there'd be no point VM offering a standalone broadband product over BT's infrastructure but everybody's raging about quad-play these days driving higher ARPU. It'd give VM some additional coverage there (assuming IPTV works properly of course), as the other quad-play product (Mobile) is not limited to VM's cabled areas either.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

True, there'd be no point VM offering a standalone broadband product over BT's infrastructure but everybody's raging about quad-play these days driving higher ARPU. It'd give VM some additional coverage there (assuming IPTV works properly of course), as the other quad-play product (Mobile) is not limited to VM's cabled areas either.

Thing is the only option to expand coverage past the existing areas would either be to pay TalkTalk Wholesale, who are unlikely to want to deal with VM, or BT Wholesale.

Both are expensive per Mbit/s.

VM's cable network usage is running at about twice the average BT Wholesale punter. No way they could pay the bills with that level of usage on an off-net product.

IPTV does work but you need a CPE that support multicast and if you're paying BT Wholesale you have to pay extra per stream to them. When you think about how many channels VM may want to throw down it gets a bit... ugh.

Really not worth it. Covering 70% of the country profitably way better than 90% with the last 20% being a pain in the arse.

[MrIca]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Again, no.


BT do not have any fibre optic telegraph wires.

BT have plenty of fibre running from telephone poles.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by MrIca

BT have plenty of fibre running from telephone poles.

Not really.

I'm not 100% on the BT network I'll admit but I do not believe they have much in the way of aerial fibre.

The last drop is still twisted pair UG or from poles, and I'm pretty certain they don't have trunk/core fibre on poles.

Unless you can show me examples of where they do?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by MrIca

BT have plenty of fibre running from telephone poles.

About 100,000 homes passed at most out of over 25.5 million active lines are fibre on poles.

The core network fibre and fibre feeding the cabinets is all underground.

BT have, in total, about 160,000 premises with fibre to the home/premises available to them.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Thing is the only option to expand coverage past the existing areas would either be to pay TalkTalk Wholesale, who are unlikely to want to deal with VM, or BT Wholesale.

Both are expensive per Mbit/s.

VM's cable network usage is running at about twice the average BT Wholesale punter. No way they could pay the bills with that level of usage on an off-net product.

They don't have to pay either TalkTalk or BT Wholesale, after all, the point of putting their own equipment in exchanges was to bypass exactly that. Vodafone are doing the same now, going straight to the Openreach handover point so they can deliver IPTV have to pay BT Wholesale zilch. You'd still have to pay OR line rental but as that's just a dumb ethernet pipe VM wouldn't have to pay BT for any for multicast or data usage.

[MrIca]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

About 100,000 homes passed at most out of over 25.5 million active lines are fibre on poles.

The core network fibre and fibre feeding the cabinets is all underground.

BT have, in total, about 160,000 premises with fibre to the home/premises available to them.

Yeah I didn't give a figure! Of course I know about the underground network, I work on it! I just used the vague term "plenty" which is correct. I come across a fair bit of overhead fibre. I've seen a lot of mobile masts fed with overhead fibre, businesses too.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Not really.

I'm not 100% on the BT network I'll admit but I do not believe they have much in the way of aerial fibre.

The last drop is still twisted pair UG or from poles, and I'm pretty certain they don't have trunk/core fibre on poles.

Unless you can show me examples of where they do?

Why do you need examples?! You'll just have to trust me I'm afraid.

[Kushan]

Just once, I'd love it if this forum didn't descend into an argument on semantics.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

They don't have to pay either TalkTalk or BT Wholesale, after all, the point of putting their own equipment in exchanges was to bypass exactly that. Vodafone are doing the same now, going straight to the Openreach handover point so they can deliver IPTV have to pay BT Wholesale zilch. You'd still have to pay OR line rental but as that's just a dumb ethernet pipe VM wouldn't have to pay BT for any for multicast or data usage.

Vodafone bought Cable and Wireless. Cable and Wireless had a presence in 936 exchanges and have sold LLU wholesale to parties including Virgin.

Give the initial project was canned it's reasonable to assume another VM unbundling project isn't likely.

---------- Post added at 17:47 ---------- Previous post was at 17:44 ----------

Originally Posted by MrIca

Yeah I didn't give a figure! Of course I know about the underground network, I work on it! I just used the vague term "plenty" which is correct. I come across a fair bit of overhead fibre. I've seen a lot of mobile masts fed with overhead fibre, businesses too.

Why do you need examples?! You'll just have to trust me I'm afraid.

Pretty sure you were responding to a comment that mentioned 'telegraph wires' though.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Vodafone bought Cable and Wireless. Cable and Wireless had a presence in 936 exchanges and have sold LLU wholesale to parties including Virgin.

Give the initial project was canned it's reasonable to assume another VM unbundling project isn't likely.[COLOR="Silver"]

Yes, I know. But the fact that it was started at all in the first place, suggests someone at some point thought it was feasible.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by MrIca

.

Why do you need examples?! You'll just have to trust me I'm afraid.

Because I have a bullpoo radar that goes off every time I sense it.

I've seen a lot of mobile masts fed with overhead fibre

I'm sensing it now.


But you can always prove me wrong, with "examples"

[MrIca]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Because I have a bullpoo radar that goes off every time I sense it.



I'm sensing it now.


But you can always prove me wrong, with "examples"

That's a strange reply, not quite sure what your problem is. Or why you think you know more than me about the network. But you've annoyed me now and I hate caving in to people like you but here's a mobile mast fed via overhead fibre

http://goo.gl/maps/5euH3

Here's another one:
http://goo.gl/maps/EN5LA

You can see the "caution overhead fibre" labels on the poles that feed them.

What on earth made you think they don't use overhead fibre to feed mobile masts? That Vodafone one next to the Shell garage I linked to has two overhead fibres to it. I have no idea why they didn't just run ducts to it. I can also show you a business park fed with overhead fibre? No doubt your bullpoo radar is going off about that also, cheeky effort.

Originally Posted by Kushan

Just once, I'd love it if this forum didn't descend into an argument on semantics.

It would be nice..Beats me why everyone has to be so aggressive,argumentative and unable to agree to disagree.

[MrIca]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

It would be nice..Beats me why everyone has to be so aggressive,argumentative and unable to agree to disagree.

I agree. But it's also frustrating the way you have to provide proof everytime you say something. If you don't produce proof you are basically accused of lying. Aside from the fact it would be pretty bizarre for me to make up facts about overhead fibre! Who would someone even do that?