Skip Navigation


BT unhappy with new Openreach pricing
Friday 22 May 2009 14:07:22 by John Hunt

Ofcom has released new price controls on BT Openreach this morning which define how the division can charge for access to the local loop including MPF (metallic path facility) and SMPF (shared metallic path facility) services. MPF is used by LLU providers who offer both an unbundled telephony service as well as broadband, and SMPF is where the provider only provides unbundled broadband. WLR (wholesale line rental) charges are to stay at their current rates until the conclusion of the Wholesale Narrowband Market Review, following a recommendation from the European Commission. BT are free to implement the price changes 28 days from today.

Current Price Proposed Price in second consultation Price for 2009/10 Indexation in 2010/11
MPF £81.69 £85 to £91 £86.40 RPI +5.5%
SMPF £15.60 £15.60 to £16.20 £15.60 RPI +1.0%

BT have expressed distate to the changes particularly as there hasn't been any inflationary increase since the prices were set in November 2005 and December 2004 for MPF and SMPF respectively.

"Ofcom has taken a tentative step towards rebalancing the market but that step is insufficient and creates real disincentives for future investment. It was previously agreed that Openreach would be allowed to fully recover its costs and that is all we are asking for.”

BT Statement

The price increases being at the lower end of the range is obviously a bonus for LLU providers whose costs will not rise that significantly. The full details of the changes are available from Ofcom.

Comments

Posted by 2doorsbob over 7 years ago
This doe's tickle me bt invented the company that now want to charge them more lol ..nutters
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Openreach are a part of BT. The issue is that they consider the Openreach price controls to force them to supply LLU below cost.
If that is actually the case I'm entirely with BT, it should be cost + margin.
Posted by chrysalis over 7 years ago
its not below cost, BT are not making a loss on LLU. The issue is the profit margin isnt up to BT's standards, I expect they not too happy they not getting their usual 100000% markup. My only concern is will this affect any local loop investment plans.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Exchange based LLU shouldn't have any investment plans apart from getting phased out in favour of FITL.

BT's margins aren't as high as you might think, see their financial results for more information.
Posted by chrysalis over 7 years ago
I never said they were high I just said they were making a profit on LLU. On ports yes profit margins arent that high even on ipstream, the real profit for BTw is on backhaul which the LLU isp's bypass and thats whats upsetting BT since they cant make it up by increasing LLU prices.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
The BTW backhaul price is regulated to cost+ as far as I know. It's worth remembering that while the backhaul cost is high the biggest IPStream ISP is BT and they also pay themselves this prodigious amount.

You will be able to get an idea from BT Wholesale's total profits of the sorts of margins they get.
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
"It was previously agreed that Openreach would be allowed to fully recover its costs and that is all we are asking for" - That doesn't sound to me like making profit if they haven't fully recovered their costs how can they be making a profit?
Posted by boggits over 7 years ago
Ofcom doesnt regulate the prices based on cost+ model but rather uses an anti-competitive model called the margin squeeze test. This is based (rather strangely) on the assumption that the Wholesale price of DataStream is used for the calculation of both the SMPF and IPStream/WMBC/WBC prices... Ofcom really need to revisit their whole set of assumptions for WBA
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
I believe though that the DataStream price is a function of cost+?

In any case no-one uses that rubbish anymore. Most operators will have gladly gotten rid of their VPs by now.
Posted by mikeblogs over 7 years ago
Not too bad is it. The MPF has no signal to noise guarantees for broadband usage. It would interesting to tie any future MPF increase tied into the quality of the copper to deliver Broadband at the expected distance from the exchange.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
@mikeblogs we want to be rid of copper, not waste BT's resources having them mess with it more.

@CB No idea what you mean, if the amount they charge is being allowed to increase by greater than RPI it surely means that its' price has been artificially low though we already knew that, it was being held low to artificially increase LLU numbers.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
@Boggits ok I was wrong and you apparently agree with me on the cost+ model, or did 5 years ago ;)

'Fundamentally the test should be based on how much it costs BT to provide the service plus an appropriate mark-up, rather than assessing the retail price of broadband services and subtracting the costs.'
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
quote "In fact where is the evidence of their so called costs?" - You mean they've not personally emailed you them yet? Man BT are slower at e-mailing their production costs out to members of public forums than they are picking up in their call centres!

I think the only thing that is "safe to say" is you've no idea what your talking about. You just make up your own facts/figures as they sound good for you and your argument.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Openreach is part of the BT Group, I would imagine no-one else said otherwise given that it's on the website and the vans. It's structurally separated from the other BT businesses, hence why they have in the past had to ask Ofcom for permission to use Wholesale engineers for Openreach amongst other things.

More at http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/telecoms_review/final_statement.htm
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
"Oh and BTW the information like this should be freely available to the public."

But as it doesn't appear to be why are you arguing black is white? You don't know either way your just speculating... as usual. Prove this prove that, the information isn't available... how can anyone prove anything. BT say its not enough, you (with all your wisdom and no evidence) say otherwise. As I can't see your evidence nor BT's its more pointless rambling.
Posted by chrysalis over 7 years ago
Dixinormous, the BT statement confuses me also, rest assured they making a operating profit on LLU ports, when they say recover costs I expect they reffering to claimed investment costs. There was some document explaining somewhere that there was a fixed profit margin agreed with ofcom and BT were not reaching that profit margin. Which indicated price rises were on the way, it was last year in 2008 I read it.
Posted by whatever2 over 7 years ago
It becomes very difficult to pull operational expenses of a project away from that of a company, which is why departments have budgets.
Is a raise in the Chairman's wages is a neccessary cost, is buying new vans or laptops the same?

Not every company likes to make profits, they often do it to raise investment revenue from the city, but they don't have to, and keeping profits low reduces tax and can increase investment.

Repayments allow profit to be made whilst capital investment is repaid.

In other words, BT/openreach, can make it up as they go along.
Posted by asrobs over 7 years ago
What you all seem to forget is that the EU is again dictating the terms of an arrangment which will curtail the introduction of fibre optics to britain I think we should vote UKIP and get out of the MORE corrupted Europe.
Posted by bluecar1 over 7 years ago
if openreach is making a loss, why is BT worldwide the only arm listed as loss making on the balance sheet?

and if BT's broadband services were so good why would customers leave to a LLU provider? could it be something to do with porr service, rubbish offshored customer service desks, interception of communication by BT using services like phorm?

peter
Posted by therioman over 7 years ago
"If openreach is making a loss, why is BT worldwide the only arm listed as loss making on the balance sheet?"

Perhaps because other services are subsidising losses, so the overall picture is profitable. BT's argument (rightly) is that they shouldn't make a loss on providing any service except if caused by it's own cock ups.
Posted by herdwick over 7 years ago
" If it were costing them they would obviously PROVE it was costing them money to Ofcom."

you mean like they did in the first place that kicked off the whole consultation thing showing that LLU margin % were below WLR and forecast inflation would mean the prevailing price caps could result in a loss in coming years.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 7 years ago
Ssh herdwick, that's using /logic/ and /facts/. Can't have those arround Carpet.

Also, gee, yet another place BT are bleeding money which would otherwise gone into infrastructure. Sigh.

bluecar1 - Or because BT cannot offer as good a deal because they are massively burdened by regulation and a regulator which places restrictions on them and not their competitors?
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
'Posted by asrobs about 7 hours ago
What you all seem to forget is that the EU is again dictating the terms of an arrangment which will curtail the introduction of fibre optics to britain I think we should vote UKIP and get out of the MORE corrupted Europe.'

No asrobs I would suggest you look throughout Europe where fibre is being actively deployed. Ofcom and UK Govt are to blame for that, no-one else.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
'Posted by Dawn_Falcon less than a minute ago

Also, gee, yet another place BT are bleeding money which would otherwise gone into infrastructure. Sigh.'

I wouldn't go as far as 'would' - history suggests that when BT have money it goes to the shareholders.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05/17/the_economics_of_fibre/
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 7 years ago
They have a duty to provide a minimum return to the shareholders, yes. Reinvestment allways comes after that, as you well know.

The very money which would go into infrastucture is the money which, by and large, is bleeding away via regulation and regulator. They need in this case to sue OFCOM to get the cost-recovery (and that itself is ridiculous, they're providing zero-profit help to their competitors) in full.

BT *explictly* say this, "real disincentives for future investment". None of this should be a surprise.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 7 years ago
Asrobs - Given the EU is the party protecting internet access against the UK government's wikipedia amendments to the telecoms package, against access limits on programs and more...

...oh right, evidently you support those things. Well, frankly, you can take your censorship and...
Posted by whatever2 over 7 years ago
"BT's argument (rightly) is that they shouldn't make a loss on providing any service except if caused by it's own cock ups."

But Ofcom's argument is that the market shouldn't suffer BT's cock ups they are already making ie, they could be more efficient.

"you mean like they did in the first place..."

You mean like they were forced to break their arm off and use margin squeeze because they couldn't.

Posted by whatever2 over 7 years ago
If you think BT would take this money and donate it to fibre, your naive.

This is the company that has only just stood on two feet having blown billions on buying companies all over the world. UK telecoms is small fry to BT.

They're worldwide arm is in trouble, dragging the company back... so do you think they would jump on something that would make them marginal profit? Deregulate, and you get the same inefficient BT back again, because BT is not interested in the customer, just it's finances.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Dawn - a minimum return to the shareholders doesn't include 2.5bn in share buyback that could and should have been invested - this is more than the entire FTTC/P spend - nor does it include the extremely high dividend that BT have historically paid.

Every telco talks about disincentives for future investment when they don't get their way.

In this case I think Ofcom are wrong and base prices on bad data and in the wrong way.
Posted by bluecar1 over 7 years ago
@Dawn_Falcon "bluecar1 - Or because BT cannot offer as good a deal because they are massively burdened by regulation and a regulator "

perhaps BT (and others) should stop bundling services at unrealistic prices to try and atract customers rather than providing a good service to exisitng ones

i am an EX BT customer who left due to poor service and phorm

peter
Posted by bluecar1 over 7 years ago
from BT on this site
"BT Wholesale also saw a revenue decline, down by 2% to £1,151m, partly due to a continued migration away from their broadband services to LLU. Openreach saw a net addition of 200,000 external LLU lines bringing the total to 5.7 million. Wholesale Line Rental (WLR) also increased by 300,000 up to 5.6 million"

BT should be asking themselves why are people leaving to LLU providers? i did as i got better service and ADSL2+

simple

peter
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
bluecar1 BT know why people go to LLU providers - LLU is cheaper to provide therefore cheaper at retail. BT Wholesale cannot compete against LLU operators and BT know this so it wouldn't be anything new.

Ofcom actually loaded the regulatory dice and price controls to ensure high LLU takeup. No surprises for BT in the slightest. BT have MSANs in 3 times the exchanges of LLU operators, these are less profitable or even not profitable to run.
Posted by alanw5 over 7 years ago
Not much to say here other than I think I agree with the Consumer ISP Awards.
I migrated from Eclipse about 6 months ago (they were excellent and still are) to O2 - for a better deal and LLU. Now Eclipse have LLU - so don't hesitate to go for any of these.
WHAT HAPPENED TO ZEN?
Posted by kendal01 over 7 years ago
you have some mental issues going on there carpet!
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
"Posted by kendal01 about 10 hours ago
you have some mental issues going on there carpet! " - For some time by the looks of it.
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
Carpet your pure hatred for the company makes you so blind. 21CN has been on-going for years as has FTTC trials long before the recession, they won't just stop. What I don't understand is you seem to like Sky (one of the worst monopoly's and greedy org's) but don't like BT?
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
And as for LLU... I couldn't agree more I would encourage anyone to go LLU if they can. But LLU is a limited area. ADSL2+ and no further. I don't believe there are any plans to open up the up and coming FTTC FTTH to other ISP's so LLU is a limited and short lived path.
Posted by KarlAustin over 7 years ago
LLU doesn't have to be - LLU companies are more than welcome to do sub-loop unbundling and putting FTTC and using VDSL from the Cab. Just that they choose not to as it's not all that cheap to do. Of course it's easy for LLU to compete on cost grounds or offer more for the same money (or less), because they pick only the exchanges that are profitable - Some like BT has to service nearly 100% of exchanges, some of which won't be profitable.
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
Do you think? At the moment they only have to put their own kit in the exchange. For VDSL it will mean in the cabinet and I'm unsure how that would work. It will be interesting to see if that happens.
Posted by boggits over 7 years ago
SLU has the downside of costing exactly the same as LLU and hasn't (as yet) had any money spent in the supporting ordering systems and engineer training.

BT managed to get out of consuming SLU as part of their FTTC rollout so it's unlikely that large amounts of effort will be spent making a scalable product until someone ponies up....
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 7 years ago
Carpetburn - It's easy to prove. This is the first rise since November 2005, inflationary costs alone would mean that they're losing money even if the origional price covered the costs (which it didn't quite) and there were no cost rises (which there have been).

Dixi - I'd read more into why BT felt the share buyback was necessary - I agree it was entirely reasonable for them to head that particular threat off immediately.

If BT are to provide a public service, they should be paid for it. Otherwise, an even commercial market should exist.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Dawn - If you could link me up it'd be appreciated. The only effect of a buyback is to increase EPS and therefore share price as far as I'm aware. It wouldn't increase the overall value of the company, it wouldn't make it any more resilient to takeover, its' sole function is an attempt to increase share price and give money to investors.

This was a stock that doubled in the previous 3 years to the buyback and paid prodigious dividends at the time so unsure why it was done beyond as a bribe to investors.

That its' first tranche was paid with debt was ridiculous, agree / disagree?
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
GMAN - BT are a bit weird with trials. You know that they originally trialled FTTP technically and commercially I think 5 years ago?

It would be interesting to see BT's own projected costs for FTTP rather than the BSG's extremely self-serving 'Give us money please Government' estimates.
Posted by chrysalis over 7 years ago
I have just spent 30 mins or so trying to find the pdf document as my source but the internet is a minefield and cannot find it, the pdf I read was from 2008 and it showed the target profit margin agreed by BT and ofcom for LLU provisioning and what the actual profit margin was, it showed BT were making a profit ie. above costs but were below the agreed margin.
Posted by chrysalis over 7 years ago
To back CB up BT seem to have lost all interest in customer service they now just whore profits wherever possible. Sky although run by an evil man (so im told) at least they value giving customers a good service. Future of LLU on FTTC? in my opinion a variant of datastream, LLU isp rents backhaul of BT from cab to exchange and then handed over to isp at same place where LLU is handed over.
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
Well... I used to think their customer service was ok, no worse or better than anyone else... until it all went offshore now its dire.

Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
"Future of LLU on FTTC? in my opinion a variant of datastream, LLU isp rents backhaul of BT from cab to exchange and then handed over to isp at same place where LLU is handed over." - Yep... certainly possible, if of course they are allowed to recoup costs, but if they are moaning about not recouping now when all they are doing is giving up cab space in an exchange I don't think they'll jumping through hoops to give up FTTC access at cost or just above having spent a fortune on putting it in.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
The documents showing the interconnect arrangements for FTTC/P are on the Openreach website.
Given that there are no price controls on FTTC/P, a very well publicised concession, that will be a non-issue.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
They know their arguement and their active imagination about BT and costs is NOT realistic if it were they could point to evidence all over the net that this charge is not enough to recoup costs.... As it is though they cant prove a damn thing...... AS USUAL
Posted by Somerset over 7 years ago
CB - anyone using terms like 'little BT fan children' cannot be taken seriously.

Time for Andrew to have another word with you - again. Maybe an other time for your posts to be deleted and a ban.
Posted by herdwick over 7 years ago
One can't expect a psychotic idiot like CB to actually read anything, far better to spout unsubstantiated tripe and slag off others.

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/openreach/ print p22 / PDF page 25 shows the costs compared to the price ceiling.

Shows cost of SMPF and MPF LLU to be above price ceiling. 5 pages later goes into inflationary projections.

Posted by comnut over 7 years ago
well your hate of the term 'little BT fan children' clearly marks you out as a boring suit....
Posted by comnut over 7 years ago

sure BT *seems* nice until you actually try to get them to do something serious, it is only then that you find they dont really want to bother, eg like switching your line over, or actually acting on your desire to use their services!!! I gave up pleading for them to switch me back to them from TT, they even promised it would happen very soon (they most likely wanted me to stop, so they could relax...) - of course, the switch back never happened, and TT is getting better and bigger, mainly due to BT not fighting for customers... :(
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
Agreed on all counts apart from Talk Talk getting bigger and better ;o)
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
@herdwick. Thanks for that, very interesting. No doubt they are lying though, well that will be CB's response. What a crazy industry where you still have to supply a service when it costs you more to actually provide it! You'd think they'd be some sort of clause where they could just refuse to do any new LLU's until pricing has been revised. I'm not surprised they are in bother.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"CB - anyone using terms like 'little BT fan children' cannot be taken seriously.

Time for Andrew to have another word with you - again. Maybe an other time for your posts to be deleted and a ban."
I cant begin to comprehend how sad and boring a life you must lead to report people for phrases you do not like. Fact remains NO BT FANBOY has shown proof. Good to see you only report people who you personally take issue with rather than as a whole. The BT fanboys call me names like "psychotic idiot", Mind you i suppose to a BT dribbling loon like yourself those posts are ok.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
If i get banned through your cry baby like antics it just goes to show im right, BT have a fanclub that like to dish the names out but not take in return.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"One can't expect a psychotic idiot like CB to actually read anything, far better to spout unsubstantiated tripe and slag off others.

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/openreach/ print p22 / PDF page 25 shows the costs compared to the price ceiling."

This from someone that cant link???
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/openreach/ print p22 /
Gives nothing but a page not found for me, id try variations, but as im an idiot i expect to be able to click a link that works.
Posted by chrysalis over 7 years ago
herdwick interesting pdf thanks, so we have a graph (supplied by BT?) showing they not recovering costs, but ofcom saying they recovering 13% in 2007 (target 10%). If I understand the document right, ofcom came to this figure by not including write offs and one of charges so only ongoingoperating costs, perhaps BT is trying to include this when they say they making a loss?
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
Oh CB you really are a star. Someone provides you with the proof you so crave and you don't want to see it? http://tinyurl.com/pa2cjg there you go. Shield your eyes from page 25 and horror shown. Of course that's only if you've got Adobe Reader installed on your PC that you'll no doubt be frantically un-installing right now to extend your stay in fantasy land.
Posted by chrysalis over 7 years ago
right I think I understand what ofcom are saying now, which means the news article has been misleading. When ofcom calculate the capital return figure they calculate across the entire line rental portfolio, so although SMPF is performing poor for openreach, currently business WLR products are exceeding 20% capital return keeping openreach above the 10% target overall. So ofcom seem to be allowing openreach to subsidise SMPF from the business products, of course in 2011/12 even with the business WLR openreach are predicting only a 1% return based on a average 4% inflation.
Posted by chrysalis over 7 years ago
gman99 please read my points, openreach are actually reaching profit target so I was right. Just that you need to look at the entire portfolion not just SMPF.
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
So reaching profit targets on a whole, but not on individual products, some products are keeping others afloat? If so I'd still be moaning wouldn't you. That's like continuing to make and sell the Ford Ka even though you don't make a profit because the Ford Focus sales are through the roof and make up for that loss? (Sorry any Ford owners :) )
Posted by Gzero over 7 years ago
Erm all I see is the word "Estimates". :/ In business you wouldn't consider that proof...

Thanks for the tiny link thouhg GMAN99, herdwick had me confused I wasn't sure what he wanted us to look at.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Any issues with posts in here can be sent to http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/newsite.html however the site admins have been *very* tolerant in the past.

Regarding estimates - Gzero it is impossible to supply 100% accurate numbers for this due to the number of factors involved, given that Ofcom accept it as proof don't see any reason why we can't.
Posted by chrysalis over 7 years ago
gman99 I dont know what I would be thinking, but I can tell you product cross subsidisation is common practice, easiest example is food supermarkets. If BT were to get their 10% on the SMPF it is probable that in return ofcom could well force them to lower business WLR the other way to stop the overall margin getting too high, so really BT are not going to get anywhere on that side of things. Their projections are also based on high inflation estimates which I expect will exceed actual inflation.
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
Even in these cash tight sometimes miserable times your postings always make me smile. I can almost hear you shouting at the screen wildly whilst typing :)
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Hard to think who, apart from a company, can accurately ascertain their costs for supplying services. That's a tricky one as all the figures that the overall cost of a product would be based on would have to come from said company.

If BT were to give false figures to Ofcom they would be in a whole world of pain, not to mention that shareholders could sue them if they falsified margins.
Posted by comnut over 7 years ago
how about stopping this bitchfest (amusing though it is.....)

and someone provide figures for OTHER ISPs/ companies profits or the lack of them ???

As for murdoch, SKY ran at a MASSIVE deficit for years, due to his confidence it would work, and now he is reaping the massive profits... I dont think he is to blame, it is / was the total lack of any other to take the massive risk he did...
Posted by comnut over 7 years ago
As for 'cash tight times' have you not seen the gov. expenses scandal??? it certainly shows how big suits have no clue of the 'outside world' and think £thousands for a decorative birdhouse in a pond is perfectly normal...
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"Even in these cash tight sometimes miserable times your postings always make me smile. I can almost hear you shouting at the screen wildly whilst typing :)"

Like i said BT fans have overly active imaginations. The only thing im doing while reading my screen is shaking my head in amazement how stupid some people truely are.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"As for murdoch, SKY ran at a MASSIVE deficit for years, due to his confidence it would work, and now he is reaping the massive profits... I dont think he is to blame, it is / was the total lack of any other to take the massive risk he did..."

Indeed comnut we can all think what we like of Sky but there is no denying over the years serious money has been invested. Like em or not their TV boxes have one of the best interfaces, phone service is priced well, and to LLU people they provide some of the fastest, cheap, home Internet possible in the UK.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"As for 'cash tight times' have you not seen the gov. expenses scandal??? it certainly shows how big suits have no clue of the 'outside world' and think £thousands for a decorative birdhouse in a pond is perfectly normal..."

GMAN99 obviously lives in a layer of cotton wool where he doesnt think that happens, a typical BT fan which has no clue LLU isnt the problem BT boss idiots at the top like this are...
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/markets/article.html?in_article_id=487104
Oh i cant wait for his stupid reply to that.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
Quick everyone bash LLU its draining BT profits so much those in charge give thereself more than £300,000 bonuses. Yep LLU thats defo the issue regarding BT making money.
Posted by kendal01 over 7 years ago
time for you to shut up cb,im sure the vast majority of casual viewers to these pages think your an argumentative spoilt little brat.
Posted by Gzero over 7 years ago
Kendal01 don't assume that view :/ if you don't like what he says then simply don't read it?????

Bet you wouldn't like to be told to shut up just because you have your view..............

Posted by comnut over 7 years ago

kendal01: you better be careful how you say that... If you find a glue factory being built next to your house, will you just say "oh well its good for the economy" or start being an "argumentative spoilt little brat" about it to your local MP, its making your life bad, health bad, and ruining your house & environment????

We need to be more vocal about bad things happening, instead of 'keeping quiet in case we insult this new culture' while forgetting about our own 'dying due to ignorance' culture!!!
Posted by comnut over 7 years ago
Nobody want to bother finding out the profit/loss figures of other ISPS???

- like CPW/TT, VM, UKFSN,Be,ZEN (yes its still around, latest review may 17.. http://tinyurl.com/n48h7p )

I'll bet they are making more profit(PERCENT of income!) ... They have to, otherwise they go out of business - no nice government supplements that BT gets..
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"ime for you to shut up cb,im sure the vast majority of casual viewers to these pages think your an argumentative spoilt little brat."
Im sure i dont give a flying toss what you or they think of me. If im the spoilt brat what does that make you for replying... A stupid Brat maybe? (Run along and complain you cant take the abuse you dish out). Thanks to Gzero and comnut for pointing out a few facts to people like this. If anyone doesnt like what i have to say with regards to comments and conversation, i suggest they get some common sense and dont read.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
Profits other ISPs make or dont make would indeed be interesting readin comnut :)
(For god sake nobody mention cable LLU or satelite broadband though and profit and loss figures, the BT posse will shout how terrible things like that are).
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
'I'll bet they are making more profit(PERCENT of income!) ... They have to, otherwise they go out of business - no nice government supplements that BT gets..'

That doesn't make a huge amount of sense comnut. I'm far from an admirer of BT but you can't compare a company a large part of whose income is on regulated rates of return to companies with no such regulation. What you are saying also makes no sense - do you not thing BT are kinda obligated to make as much profit as possible? They don't make less profit than other companies for the fun of it.
Posted by kendal01 over 7 years ago
cb, you could just stop repeating yourself and telling everyone they are wrong and you are right, you may even garner some respect for that. not everything is black and white you should know that.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
Still doesnt alter the fact that if LLU costs them so much money then why is it those at the top help thereself to more than a quarter of a million bonuses? I have no sympathy for the scummy company, those in charge and share holders help thereself to much more than anything like LLU costs them. In fact i say well done to ofcom for not increasing what they are allowed to charge to whatever figure it is BT thinks would be fair.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 7 years ago
Dixi - Short version? Government threats as to "unsuitable" companys holding shares. Again, BT doesn't compete in anything /like/ a fair marketplace.

Carpet - Your awful, terrible BT-dependent connection. Lol.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Interesting Mr Falcon, in the words of Johnny Five more input! :)
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"Carpet - Your awful, terrible BT-dependent connection."

My "broadband connection" is in no way dependant on BT. I can sleep easy knowing my ISP is not held to ransom by BT... You on the other hand though as you are always thinking (wrongly as usual) have to pay for my LLU and aid in filling fat cat pockets http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/markets/article.html?in_article_id=487104
Enjoy your slow MAX based IPstream product and run along!
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
Long live LLU, Long live the dunces that think they fund it and long live fat cat bonuses... God bless the BT fanboys!
Posted by Somerset over 7 years ago
CB - how about thinking about solutions for all.

How is your connection made?
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
CB your broadband connection is very dependent on BT, the copper that gets you to the exchange is BT owned (SMPF), the backhaul that gets your data out of the exchange is BT owned (BES), the UPS that feeds your MSAN is BT owned and managed.
Posted by Gzero over 7 years ago
Dixi, he still pays for it, not like he's getting it for free. Shame it is all owned by BT, a cowardly company that charges £££ if they find no problem... not dissing the good engineers, but surely that is the engineers job: to ensure everyone's' connection is working whether they find a fault or not?
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"CB - how about thinking about solutions for all."

I agree entirely i thought the new rules regarding everyone must get 2Mb would be a start but as usual that turns out to be nothing but hot air and a list of rules BT can happily wriggle out of.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"CB your broadband connection is very dependent on BT, the copper that gets you to the exchange is BT owned (SMPF), the backhaul that gets your data out of the exchange is BT owned (BES), the UPS that feeds your MSAN is BT owned and managed."
Or the short non techno babble term. I depend on them for a phone line, something i am happy with from BT is there phone service, always have been. If i depend on BT for my "broadband" connection then tell me, why do i have to go to an LLU company to get 18Mb? If im so dependant on BT surely they should be offeering me the same speeds, shouldnt they?
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
BT may own the copper cable (nice of Dawn to admit they have a monopoly strangle hold in the UK at last, atleast thats what i assume they mean by "dependant").

Do i depend on BT to give me the actual "BROADBAND" connection rate though, if i do why isnt BT offering the same speeds and quality of service, with no silly monthly limits. I depend on their MONOPOLY ownership of copper cable... YES! I dont depend on them for my actual BROADBAND SPEED OR SERVICE.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
Either way BT fans loose this arguement, even if you want to argue im wrong and insist i depend on BT thats fine with me also. Just further shows they have a monopoly on phone and broadband services in the UK and dont deserve or need to be paid more from LLU companies..... Result again is (and i re-quote from an earlier post) "I say well done to ofcom for not increasing what they are allowed to charge to whatever figure it is BT thinks would be fair."
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Gzero is the engineer can't find a fault how is he supposed to ensure the service is working? The same partitioning between Openreach and other BT divisions is why an Openreach engineer can't resolve everything. Openreach can't pull strings will Wholesale or Retail any more than they can with Sky. Their sole responsibility is the copper loop and we can't have it both ways. BT are either structurally separated or they are not.
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
"If i depend on BT for my "broadband" connection then tell me, why do i have to go to an LLU company to get 18Mb? If im so dependant on BT surely they should be offeering me the same speeds, shouldnt they?" Because BT don't offer ADSL2+ yet as a package. Unlike other ISP's who cherrypick the most profitable exchanges BT will have to roll out ADSL2+ to all exchanges profitable or not. When they do you can have 18Mb from BT should you want it, which of course you won't ;o)
Posted by Gzero over 7 years ago
GMAN99 "Unlike other ISP's who cherrypick the most profitable exchanges" which way are you arguing? BT aren't saints, BT do the same... regardless if they have to roll it out to everyone, we seen it happen with MAX lol.
Posted by Somerset over 7 years ago
Cb - ' I depend on their MONOPOLY ownership of copper cable'

If you can come up with a better way of managing the copper cables please let us know.

It's Openreach who own the network, different to BT Retail.
Posted by GMAN99 over 7 years ago
No they are not saints but you know what I'm getting at. Unlike other ISP's when a product goes live its expected everywhere whether 5 or 500 people on the exchange want it.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"Because BT don't offer ADSL2+ yet as a package."

So i dont depend on Bt for my broadband service then as they dont provide it.

quote"Unlike other ISP's who cherrypick the most profitable exchanges BT will have to roll out ADSL2+ to all exchanges profitable or not"

Rubbish defence 21CN and ADSL2+ from BT will be rolled out over several years... No different to how LLU has grown oveer several years.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"When they do you can have 18Mb from BT should you want it, which of course you won't ;o)"

Indeed why would i pay more for a limited service with line profiling? Oh and thats without the other issues 21CN has had.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"If you can come up with a better way of managing the copper cables please let us know."

I truely believe it would be better nowadays if it was left in public ownership hands. Even if it wasnt atleast fat cats at the top wouldnt be milking the profits for bonuses rather than improvement to services.

quote"It's Openreach who own the network, different to BT Retail"

At the end of the day thats rubbish in so many ways, they are the same group and will pat each others backs before they pat anyone elses.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"No they are not saints but you know what I'm getting at. Unlike other ISP's when a product goes live its expected everywhere whether 5 or 500 people on the exchange want it."

Trouble is that rarely happens and all their products are slowly rolled out, it happened with MAX is happening with 21CN also.

Of course people demand they roll out the services to every area, i thought we had already agreed everyone including myself (atleast according to you BT mob) depend upon BT for broadband services.
Posted by comnut over 7 years ago
Um, a quote from ofcom's website...
"Ofcom today confirmed the new prices that Openreach, a separate division within BT Group plc..."

its still BT, then......
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
^^^ Exactly... Pretty laughable when BT fans try to pretend they are 2 different entitys entirely, rather than a 2 headed beast which is what they really are.
Posted by rasczak over 7 years ago
Tried not to feed the trolls but I can't help it. Carpetburn said "quote"It's Openreach who own the network, different to BT Retail"

At the end of the day thats rubbish in so many ways, they are the same group and will pat each others backs before they pat anyone elses."
Seeing as you like proof, would you care to provide proof for your allegation of illegal behaviour on the part of BT.
Posted by rasczak over 7 years ago
If you can not provide proof then your statement is potentially libelous. Now just being obnoxious may not be enough for a ban from these fora, but potentially opening up the site to legal action, see Goddard Vs Demon, might be.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
'Posted by Dixinormous 9 days ago
Openreach is part of the BT Group, I would imagine no-one else said otherwise given that it's on the website and the vans. It's structurally separated from the other BT businesses, hence why they have in the past had to ask Ofcom for permission to use Wholesale engineers for Openreach amongst other things.

More at http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/telecoms_review/final_statement.htm'

Once again no-one in this thread comnut / CB has said otherwise so unsure why you're labouring the point?
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
rasczak - The burden of proof is sadly a very variable thing, and in some cases even when definitive proof is provided it is mocked, while baseless statements are made and are just true by default because their poster said so.
Posted by rasczak over 7 years ago
Dixinormous, do we have any proof as to your sarcastic nature :-p
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Absolutely reams of it and I will sue anyone who tries to claim otherwise!
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
Incidentally it was Godfrey Vs Demon Internet :p
Posted by rasczak over 7 years ago
Why did I get Goddard stuck in my head for that one. The doctor made usenet a fun place to be for a while.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
I wondered if you were watching Trisha or something...
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 7 years ago
Carpet - So you won't mind it when the physical wire to your house gets taken away then? Good, it'll improve the quality of conversation arround here. BT is BT is BT.

Comnut - HUH? BT dosn't GET government funding. They have several orders of magnitude more regulation to deal with, which ends up comming out of their own pocket.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"Seeing as you like proof, would you care to provide proof for your allegation of illegal behaviour on the part of BT."

What are you babbling about i didnt accuse them of anything illegal i just stated what is true they are both part of the same organisation, if you think for a split second Openreach for example will put another company before BT retail you clearly have mental issues.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"Carpet - So you won't mind it when the physical wire to your house gets taken away then? Good, it'll improve the quality of conversation arround here. BT is BT is BT."

Why would a TELEPHONE cable get taken away from my house? Im very happy with their TELEPHONE services. Im more than happy to keep their phone and pay another company for my broadband, a company that can provide speed and quality. Speaking of which FTTC... 2Mb uprate HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you can keep that wire LOL
Posted by rasczak over 7 years ago
Carpetburn said, "i (sic) didnt(sic) accuse them of anything illegal"
Now we have proof that you don't understand the regulatory framework BT group companies work under, until you can show that you have grasped that understanding, anything else you post is meaningless, as if it wasn't meaningless anyway.
Posted by Dixinormous over 7 years ago
The issue CB is that you and comnut are the only posters in this entire conversation who even raised the issue of Openreach not being a part of the BT Group.

Regarding Openreach giving BT Retail any sort of priority, given that they don't sell to BT Retail but to Wholesale, who Wholesale the products to BT Retail amongst others to, well, retail, it's a non-issue. For Openreach to favour any other BT division is a violation of equivalence legislation, hence illegal. Why do you think all DSL orders are listed as LLU? Openreach don't even know who they are patching to!
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"Carpetburn said, "i (sic) didnt(sic) accuse them of anything illegal"
Now we have proof that you don't understand the regulatory framework BT group companies work under"

Oh LOL EPIC FAIL!
I think you will find depending on the precise organisation within the BT group they have their own individual regulatory framework (EXAMPLE Openreach have rules that BT retail obviously do not as the 2 companies do differing things).
Why am i not shocked as well throwing flem around you are a wannabe armchair lawyer. Awww another day of communicating with a stupid internet user.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
Please also point where i directly accused any BT organisation of illegal practice... Ofcom acknowledge and accept Openreach and BT retail are part of the same group BTW, they also accept they both work together.... Mayb e before you dream up accusations you should go read some statements of fact.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"The issue CB is that you and comnut are the only posters in this entire conversation who even raised the issue of Openreach not being a part of the BT Group."

Huh I thought i did the opposite by stating they are the same group, and did so more than once.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
Besides this is funny now.... People not liking what i say LOL..... Too bad their pointless opinions mean nothing and the decision on what BT can charge LLU companies has been made and no matter how much they scream it aint changing. BOO HOO!
Posted by rasczak over 7 years ago
Carpetburn said "Awww another day of communicating with a stupid internet user."
I think that is exactly how we all feel about you, so glad you have finally admitted it.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 7 years ago
quote"Carpetburn said "Awww another day of communicating with a stupid internet user."
I think that is exactly how we all feel about you, so glad you have finally admitted it."

Mistake one... Your attempt at thought
Mistake two... Thinking i care
Mistake three... Inability to comprehend Different BT divisions have certain set rules which do not apply to other divisions
Mistake four.... Big wannabe armchair lawyer, tiny IQ
Posted by rasczak over 7 years ago
Carpetburn, your mistake is to confuse knowledge and facts, with opinion and FUD. I'll give you a clue, although I reckon it would probably take a very large cluebat applied many tmes to even begin to get it through to you, I have the former, you the latter.
Posted by rasczak over 7 years ago
And I know you don't care, we can see that from your, and who I believe to be, though I am willing to be proved wrong, your sockpuppet, Comnut's, comebacks which are short on fact and high on bile.
Posted by rasczak over 7 years ago
Now time to stop feeding the trolls
Posted by Somerset over 7 years ago
CB - any chance of you discussing topics politely? Why do you write like this?
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.