Why No Virgin Cable In Thanet Kent Why?

Comments

• moox Posts: 18,880

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  22/07/11 - 22:05 #2

  Having live in South London all my life

  
  Then you may not realise that London is pretty much a different world to the rest of the country.
  
  Virgin probably isn't there because it's not profitable enough, and that it's too expensive to roll out their service (lots of the country cannot get cable). The companies that make up Virgin Media (NTL and Telewest) both went through a lengthy bankruptcy procedure because of debts incurred through building their networks.
  
  That's why Virgin has barely extended their footprint - really they are only bothering to expand on a street by street basis in the areas they are already in, and only if it is cheap/easy enough to do so. I seem to recall them kicking up a stink over using BT's underground ducts for their own cables but I don't think much has happened there. If they could use this, it'd save a lot of money.

  0
• JordanT91 Posts: 789

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  22/07/11 - 22:10 #3

  There's no cable in my area, being right on the edge of a city.

  0
• Gage Posts: 1,253

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  22/07/11 - 22:41 #4

  We had Cable and Wireless back in the days when they first rolled it out, but we later moved to Sky due to the poor service they had. I cannot comment on Virgin, but at my new property we live in a non-cabled area which I am not fussed about as we already have FTTC.

  0
• thenetworkbabe Posts: 45,624

  Forum Member

  ✭

  23/07/11 - 03:08 #5

  cynet wrote: »

  Can anyone help or point me in the right direction in the reasons why there is no Virgin Cable services in Thanet South East Kent.
  
  Having live in South London all my life I miss having the Virgin TV and Internet, but for reasons beyond me there is no service in the whole of Thanet which leaves Sky and BT cleaning up on the competition front, but be nice to have a competitive price with regards to services of this nature.
  
  So if anyone can show me the way in finding out why this is the case I would appreciate it, thank you.

  
  There's no cable in Canterbury either - its a problem for most of the area, and in the rural areas of E Kent you may be left on 1mb with no one but BT and only their up to 8mb service on offer. Its basically that the market is too small and not wealthy enough . No one can be bother to compete and BT can't be bothered to invest. Some people reckon that there are other limitations like Canterbury being too hilly, or in Margate's case its too cliffy - that may be complete nonsense but someone told me cable doesn't cope well with steep hills.

  0
• DAVE02 Posts: 1,137

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  23/07/11 - 08:50 #6

  these to parts of east kent have Virgin cable
  http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/NDDOV
  http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/NDFOL

  0
• ney Posts: 12,516

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  23/07/11 - 09:10 #7

  There is also no Vrigin cable in my end of town.
  There is also a new housing estate to the east of my area that Virgin also do not cover and I dont think they will. I have heard some say Virgin is ok.
  BT offer FTTC to 80% of my town.
  
  Darren

  0
• pixel_pixel Posts: 6,694

  Forum Member

  ✭

  23/07/11 - 22:45 #8

  I think I am right in saying that there will be no new additional areas in the UK to have cable laid. What is out there will remain and if you haven't got it your not likely to get it. It was back in the 1980s/90s that most areas that cable companies decided on the areas that would be profitable to cable. It annoys me that Virgin constantly boast fast broadband speeds/tv services, but do not offer an alternative service for those in non cable areas.

  0