BT Open Up Ducting - Look To Use Virgin's

[Horizon]

Originally Posted by Pierre

As I say, the vast majority of their connections to the customers are aerial copper fed by a pole. Even the report states to provide fibre aerially BT would.

Can you direct me to the report and paragraph which says BT's telegraph poles can't be used for fibre, please?

[Ignitionnet]

Reminds me, in case I wasn't clear access to BT's poles is also included in this.

As you may know Horizon / Verizon BT have already conducted trials attaching fibre to existing copper from poles. I saw a video of them blowing fibre through a tube attached to a line somewhere.

---------- Post added at 20:59 ---------- Previous post was at 20:56 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

As I say, the vast majority of their connections to the customers are aerial copper fed by a pole. Even the report states to provide fibre aerially BT would.

You probably want to be telling BT this, they seem to be under the impression the mix is about 50:50 overhead / underground.

http://www.wlga.gov.uk/uploads/publications/6002.pdf

Page 23.

[Horizon]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Reminds me, in case I wasn't clear access to BT's poles is also included in this.

As you may know Horizon / Verizon BT have already conducted trials attaching fibre to existing copper from poles. I saw a video of them blowing fibre through a tube attached to a line somewhere.

Just to be clear, are you saying that BT are happy to open up their poles to all? Where can I find the quote please? Plus, if you know where to find the vid, would be most grateful, plus the results of their trials too.

Would love to hear a BT engineer explain, with a straight face, why fibre can't be slung from the poles. Perhaps the poles are too high to climb...

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Verizon

Just to be clear, are you saying that BT are happy to open up their poles to all? Where can I find the quote please? Plus, if you know where to find the vid, would be most grateful, plus the results of their trials too.

Would love to hear a BT engineer explain, with a straight face, why fibre can't be slung from the poles. Perhaps the poles are too high to climb...

Fibre can be slung from the poles, that was my point. It'll be one of the ways to get glass to homes they trial in MK / Highams Park.

Yes BT are happy to open their poles, they are part of the access network along with the ducts.

http://www.broadbandchoices.co.uk/bt...ls-090210.html

Ian Livingston, BT CEO, said: “We told Ofcom last year we're willing to provide open access to our ducts and poles and we are working with them on how to achieve it. Other companies already have access to our exchanges so we're relaxed about providing them with another form of access as well.

[Horizon]

:.....thanks for that, most interesting, but do we believe him?

The Government has been running multiple consultations on open access, the one specifically about access to poles is here:

http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file52419.pdf

The consultation closed in November and many companies responded and these responses can be found on the internet. All except BT's response, that is. Nowhere can I find BT's response to this...

I believe BT will fight tooth and nail to prevent access to its poles. They are the key to all this. So, in response to:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Thoughts?

BT would love access to VM's network, being as it's the only cable tv network in the country of size. But I do not believe for one second BT are genuine about opening up theirs.

In regards to open access to VM's network, VM are a private company and despite increasing cash flow are still 6 billion in debt and shareholders have yet to see a return on their money. If VM were forced to open up their network, VM would take it to court and I believe would win. Berkett also made mention of technical reasons why open access would be difficult as VM's cables to houses are coaxial surrounded by a twisted copper pair. He said, how do you separate the cables and who gets access to what? In theory, other companies could, as an example, be allowed access to the copper pair, but where do other ISP's equipment go? In already crowded street cabinets? There are no telephone exchanges of course.

From VM's perspective, I do not believe open access to VM's network should happen. From a personal perspective, I would love as many services for as cheap as possible, so I'm all in favour of it!

Back to BT.

They're a private company like VM, why should they keep having to allow competitors access to their network? Of course, the reason is that 90% of that network was built with public money.

Either of two things need to happen:

1 - The Government will force BT to open up its poles to competitors so that they can sling fibre from them. Or, more likely, BT slings the fibre and allows access to competitors.

I think this is the most workable solution for now and is actually happening. BT are installing fibre to some poles which then feeds into their street cabinets. Then copper comes out of the cabinets and into houses all using VDSL2 technology. My area goes live in April.

The problem is, this is a short term measure. This technology will not cope with 100, 200, 1000mb speeds that new services of the future will require. There is also an inherent unfairness on BT in that it has to use its resources to facilitate competitors, ie it still has to send a bloke round to unlock the telephone exchange when Mr Orange turns up to install his equipment. So, that leaves:

2 - Openreach (which is now conveniently separated from BT to some extent) becomes state controlled.

Poles, cabinets and buildings housing telephone exchanges become state assets perhaps administered and maintained by local councils or by a public service company similar to how National Rail is run.

The State pays for the cost of slinging fibre to all poles then allows wholesale access to all. BT is freed from its "burden" of owning and maintaining an open access network and runs services to houses on a level peg with all its competitors.

The downside is the several billion that the State has to pay for the fibre. Not easy in a recession and it's us, via taxes, that will pay for it...

[Turkey Machine]

Don't forget BT is now a private company.

Whilst the state may regulate BT to do the legwork, they should also have a pair and stick it to VM to do the same. Wholesale cable as well as wholesale telephones? Yes please!

[Horizon]

....and they would stay so. But the part of it built with public money would become state controlled again.

In a age of "new" Labour privatising left (excuse the pun) right and centre. Could the unthinkable happen and a new Conservative government (should they win) nationalise some assets such as Openreach?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Verizon

:.....thanks for that, most interesting, but do we believe him?

It has been announced, it is happening.

BT would love access to VM's network, being as it's the only cable tv network in the country of size. But I do not believe for one second BT are genuine about opening up theirs.

BT aren't asking for access to the active cable network just the ducting so the rest of this section is moot.

1 - The Government will force BT to open up its poles to competitors so that they can sling fibre from them. Or, more likely, BT slings the fibre and allows access to competitors.

No - the agreement is BT to allow access to its' poles and ducts. BT are already obliged to provide access to any next generation access network on a bitstream basis.

The problem is, this is a short term measure. This technology will not cope with 100, 200, 1000mb speeds that new services of the future will require. There is also an inherent unfairness on BT in that it has to use its resources to facilitate competitors, ie it still has to send a bloke round to unlock the telephone exchange when Mr Orange turns up to install his equipment. So, that leaves:

Yes - however 50% of FTTC investment will be reused in FTTH/P. There have been for years products to allow BT's competitors to install their own equipment in cabinets and it has been done. It's called subloop unbundling and has been around as long as local loop unbundling.

2 - Openreach (which is now conveniently separated from BT to some extent) becomes state controlled.

Not going to happen, and in any event nothing convenient about it. Most of the pension liabilities are with Openreach and it's a bureaucratic pain in the backside to get things done with but necessary.

You forgot option 3.

3 - BT, Virgn Media and others are obliged to offer non-discriminatory access to their ducts and poles at regulated cost+ rates. BT to continue to be obliged to offer bit stream access to their NGA / Next Generation Access network. Virgin Media to offer a wholesale broadband product.

Which is what appears to be the most likely course of events. This does depend in no small part however on which party ends up in power. If Labour win they may decide to give up any attempt at not being socialist and decide to do it themselves with more money they don't have. Option 3 is what the Tories have mooted.

---------- Post added at 13:17 ---------- Previous post was at 13:15 ----------

Originally Posted by Verizon

....and they would stay so. But the part of it built with public money would become state controlled again.

In a age of "new" Labour privatising left (excuse the pun) right and centre. Could the unthinkable happen and a new Conservative government (should they win) nationalise some assets such as Openreach?

Conservatives are about smaller government and free markets, not enlarging government through nationalisation and interfering in free markets. To do so would be a bizarre and most un-conservative act.

EDIT: Plus, simply, who pays? We have a lot more pressing things to do with the tax payer's money than fit fibre to Farmer Giles' barn.

[tvtimes]

I can't wait to see what happens when BT wholesale out to Sky and VM i think competition is really going to drive bb orices down either than or we will see a clear right winner of the bb war. Plus VM will have access to another 40% of the country is it? Leaving only 10% not cabled. I imagine VM will see a massive influx of customers signing up to their TIVO tv service when they could not get it before. They could probably pay their debts a lot quicker then

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by tvtimes

I can't wait to see what happens when BT wholesale out to Sky and VM i think competition is really going to drive bb orices down either than or we will see a clear right winner of the bb war. Plus VM will have access to another 40% of the country is it? Leaving only 10% not cabled. I imagine VM will see a massive influx of customers signing up to their TIVO tv service when they could not get it before. They could probably pay their debts a lot quicker then

What?

BT have been wholesaling out to Sky since the launch of Sky Broadband - it is using BT products. Openreach products to reach the LLU areas and Wholesale products to get to those that aren't connected to unbundled exchanges.

VM have had access to the extra 50% of the country via BT's wholesale products, how do you think Chris is using Virgin National?

I have no idea what you are trying to say or what you are talking about with regard to Tivo, etc, you appear to have not noted the various developments with regards to structural separation of BT and wholesale access to the BT customer base.

If you think Virgin are going to suddenly cable an extra 40% of the country you're simply wrong, especially given Pierre seems to think that the BT assets are so low value. VM are trialling expansion of their network via BT's network and fibre to the cabinet using existing BT products.

VM magically paying their debts quicker is also somewhat incorrect, VM would be spending a not inconsiderable amount of money developing the network with no guarantee of good returns on any investment so would be incurring further debt doing such a deployment.

[tvtimes]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

What?

BT have been wholesaling out to Sky since the launch of Sky Broadband - it is using BT products. Openreach products to reach the LLU areas and Wholesale products to get to those that aren't connected to unbundled exchanges.

VM have had access to the extra 50% of the country via BT's wholesale products, how do you think Chris is using Virgin National?

I have no idea what you are trying to say or what you are talking about with regard to Tivo, etc, you appear to have not noted the various developments with regards to structural separation of BT and wholesale access to the BT customer base.

If you think Virgin are going to suddenly cable an extra 40% of the country you're simply wrong, especially given Pierre seems to think that the BT assets are so low value. VM are trialling expansion of their network via BT's network and fibre to the cabinet using existing BT products.

VM magically paying their debts quicker is also somewhat incorrect, VM would be spending a not inconsiderable amount of money developing the network with no guarantee of good returns on any investment so would be incurring further debt doing such a deployment.

You have completely and entirely misunderstood my post.

I am aware BT already wholesale to Sky! I am aware Sky are offering their BB through BT's network i'm not that dumb. I was talking about when BT build their fibre network. I'm not interested in Chris and VM national. I am talking about when BT release fibre to the other 40% of the country which is currently not 'fibred up'

What i am trying to say about Tivo is when they and VM team up and Tivo comes back into this country this is going to be a big advancement over what pvrs are currently available on VM and Sky. Coupled with IPTV, internet ondemand delivery and what VM already have in their ondemand portfolio is going to make it groundbreaking in this country. Like i have said before Tivo dominates the US market for Pvr's, Taiwan, Australia etc. It is the PVR to have.

I never mentioned VM were going to cable an extra 40% of the country, again you missconsrewed my post. I was talking about when BT wholesale their fibre network to their competitors. Vm will have a possible 40 extra percentage of the country and they won't have the maitenance costs either. Therefore vm will have a big influx of customers that will drive up revenue for them. I never said vm would 'magically' pay off all their debt. This will take years but the customer reach is going to expand massively and that will certainly help with VM's burdening debt.

I'm sorry if i wasn't clear enough.

[Horizon]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

BT aren't asking for access to the active cable network just the ducting so the rest of this section is moot..

Why would BT want access to VM's ducts, but not their CATV network, when they have telephone poles which cover the entire country? BT is the only company with 100% coverage to UK homes.

It's not clear what BT are asking for, if at all. Only what articles quoting them as saying. It seems to me that BT just want to cause waves for VM.

No - the agreement is BT to allow access to its' poles and ducts. BT are already obliged to provide access to any next generation access network on a bitstream basis.

What agreement are you referring to? If such an agreement exists why are the government consulting about opening up access to BT's poles? - I provided the link to the consultation document earlier.

Yes - however 50% of FTTC investment will be reused in FTTH/P. There have been for years products to allow BT's competitors to install their own equipment in cabinets and it has been done. It's called subloop unbundling and has been around as long as local loop unbundling.

Please name an area where this subloop unbundling has happened which allows BT's competitors to offer fibre services to homes??

How can all this stuff been around for years when BT have only just begun a programme to install FTTC to some areas? How do you know 50% of the FTTC investment will be reused for FTTH, as good as it sounds? How can BT's competitors offer FFTH services when they don't have access to the poles? Although you seem to think they do.

Not going to happen, and in any event nothing convenient about it. Most of the pension liabilities are with Openreach and it's a bureaucratic pain in the backside to get things done with but necessary.

Very good point. Seems a good reason why BT would be quite happy to offload Openreach onto the State.

Conservatives are about smaller government and free markets, not enlarging government through nationalisation and interfering in free markets. To do so would be a bizarre and most un-conservative act.

EDIT: Plus, simply, who pays? We have a lot more pressing things to do with the tax payer's money than fit fibre to Farmer Giles' barn.

Indeed, but that is the issue. Whether it be the farmer's barn or Mrs McBride in the Outer Hebrides, nobody wants to pay. And I think BT have a strong case to say why should they (under the universal service obligation) pay for faster broadband to these areas when competitors are under no such obligations.

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by Verizon

Would love to hear a BT engineer explain, with a straight face, why fibre can't be slung from the poles. Perhaps the poles are too high to climb...

Fibre is available with a built in catenary wire for stringing between poles, the same type of fibre is also used to remote antennas via balloons or Helikites using radio over fibre technology.

I knew my CATV experience would have some use in the future in other industries.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by tvtimes

You have completely and entirely misunderstood my post.

I am aware BT already wholesale to Sky! I am aware Sky are offering their BB through BT's network i'm not that dumb. I was talking about when BT build their fibre network. I'm not interested in Chris and VM national. I am talking about when BT release fibre to the other 40% of the country which is currently not 'fibred up'

BT have announced nothing of the sort so no idea what you're talking about.

What i am trying to say about Tivo is when they and VM team up and Tivo comes back into this country this is going to be a big advancement over what pvrs are currently available on VM and Sky. Coupled with IPTV, internet ondemand delivery and what VM already have in their ondemand portfolio is going to make it groundbreaking in this country. Like i have said before Tivo dominates the US market for Pvr's, Taiwan, Australia etc. It is the PVR to have.

Repeating BT have announced nothing of the sort so no idea what you're talking about. BT making their access plant available doesn't make FTTP from OLOs miraculously appear.

Acronym soup intended.

I never mentioned VM were going to cable an extra 40% of the country, again you missconsrewed my post. I was talking about when BT wholesale their fibre network to their competitors. Vm will have a possible 40 extra percentage of the country and they won't have the maitenance costs either. Therefore vm will have a big influx of customers that will drive up revenue for them. I never said vm would 'magically' pay off all their debt. This will take years but the customer reach is going to expand massively and that will certainly help with VM's burdening debt.

I'm sorry if i wasn't clear enough.

I have no idea why you think BT would magically deploy fibre to 40% of the least desirable 50% of the UK - not going to happen. You clearly have no idea how this is all working else you'd understand BT's fibre deployment will raise the deep fibre availability, without government subsidy, from 50% to 60-65%-ish of the UK population, that being the financially viable amount without government cash.

[tvtimes]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

BT have announced nothing of the sort so no idea what you're talking about.



Repeating BT have announced nothing of the sort so no idea what you're talking about. BT making their access plant available doesn't make FTTP from OLOs miraculously appear.

Acronym soup intended.



I have no idea why you think BT would magically deploy fibre to 40% of the least desirable 50% of the UK - not going to happen. You clearly have no idea how this is all working else you'd understand BT's fibre deployment will raise the deep fibre availability, without government subsidy, from 50% to 60-65%-ish of the UK population, that being the financially viable amount without government cash.

BT will be doing fibre to the cab will they not? Therefore improving speeds. Gordon Brown wants the Uk to have superfast BB by 2017. I imagine BT will be used seeing as they already have 100% country coverage. Then when that happens Sky vm and so forth will be using the network like they can now.

Plus people are talking about a possible ftth via their poles. This is what i meant by BT using their network to fibre another 40% of homes. I do understand thank you very much, how very patronising of you. if you look more carefully i was talking about an extra 40% that will be available through BT as VM already have 50%. Therefore there will be access to 40% more of the country where they did not have the choice of fibre before.