|
||||||||
BT will be forced to legally separate from Openreach. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,700
|
BT will be forced to legally separate from Openreach.
It's just been announced that Ofcom will force BT to legally separate from Openreach.
No link as yet. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Scotland, Dunfermline Area
Posts: 10,698
|
I found this link on the BBC website. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38141510
Not sure if this move will be a good or bad thing but I do know that broadband in some parts of the country could do with being improved a little more. Although I'm most happy with the BT service I get. I have had a few minor problems with BT over the years. I'm on BT Infinity and get speeds of about 68mb 98% of the time. Darren |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Crawley, West Sussex
Posts: 9,295
|
Deleted. Beaten to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,366
|
Quote:
I found this link on the BBC website. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38141510
Not sure if this move will be a good or bad thing but I do know that broadband in some parts of the country could do with being improved a little more. Although I'm most happy with the BT service I get. I have had a few minor problems with BT over the years. I'm on BT Infinity and get speeds of about 68mb 98% of the time. Darren It's more to give the same standard of service to all of Openreach's customers. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,058
|
just had an OR engineer fix my BB and he told me customer service had gone downhill since BT and OR split. Worked better all under one roof.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Central Belt
Posts: 12,268
|
Instead of isp's saying you need a BT line to use their service, they will say you need an ADSL line and filter to use their service instead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
|
Quote:
just had an OR engineer fix my BB and he told me customer service had gone downhill since BT and OR split. Worked better all under one roof.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London
Posts: 1,825
|
Quote:
Yet the best non-BT ISPs still seem to get OR to do what BT Retail can't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 28,724
|
Well the news didn't affact their share price, it went up 1% today. The decline this year is 28% compared to say Sky's 31% decline. Having it as a separate company still within the BT group must be seen as an expected compromise then, the effect of which on share prices has been long discounted by the markets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
|
Quote:
Like what?
Getting BT Retail to pass these problems on is like hitting a brick wall. Getting a niche ISP to do it is rather easier. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 534
|
Quote:
Like fixing strange / intermittent faults? Fixing database issues (where "computer says no" to fibre or broadband when it's actually available) - all the things that can't necessarily be fixed at a click of a button and/or require a bit of thought.
Getting BT Retail to pass these problems on is like hitting a brick wall. Getting a niche ISP to do it is rather easier. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 1,973
|
Quote:
I found this link on the BBC website. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38141510
Not sure if this move will be a good or bad thing but I do know that broadband in some parts of the country could do with being improved a little more. Although I'm most happy with the BT service I get. I have had a few minor problems with BT over the years. I'm on BT Infinity and get speeds of about 68mb 98% of the time. Darren |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,881
|
Quote:
A little more? A lot needs to be improved drastically! A lot of areas is very dire.
Its why the cheapest option is always used, especially in rural areas. Of course there are plenty of exceptions to that rule where even FTTP has been rolled out. But by and large BT or its delinqent Openreach are not going pay for expensive upgrades without a wedge of cash to subsidise it. Do the arse end of all of this, rural areas are being upgraded to FTTC mostly and a majority of that is done through public subsidy from BDUK. Why should the taxpayer being subsidising the cost of broadband for those whole live in areas where the cost of upgrades are uneconomical to a company like BT? |
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
|
Quote:
Exactly the same can be said of any mass market ISP/CP, like TT or Sky etc,
Quote:
'niche' tends to be more expensive, and if someone is paying significantly more for what is basically the same product, then they should expect better customer service
Quote:
but all of this is a little off topic, if OR is a legally separate company albeit still part of BT's group , it will have no impact whatsoever on the service end users receive from their ISP/CP,
As a customer of another CP I don't want a penny of my money being spent on non-OR activities. I want it spent on OR or BT Wholesale infrastructure - whether it is for me or for someone else. Quote:
some CP/ISP's (who have a pretty obvious vested interest in damaging BT as a competitor) who were pushing for 'full separation' claim a separate OR would invest more and perform better but their is no reason why either should be the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
|
Quote:
That maybe the case but tell me which company or business would invest in areas that are uneconomical or where the rate of return is outmatched by the sums spent on it?
Its why the cheapest option is always used, especially in rural areas. Of course there are plenty of exceptions to that rule where even FTTP has been rolled out. But by and large BT or its delinqent Openreach are not going pay for expensive upgrades without a wedge of cash to subsidise it. Do the arse end of all of this, rural areas are being upgraded to FTTC mostly and a majority of that is done through public subsidy from BDUK. Why should the taxpayer being subsidising the cost of broadband for those whole live in areas where the cost of upgrades are uneconomical to a company like BT? |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 1,973
|
Quote:
That maybe the case but tell me which company or business would invest in areas that are uneconomical or where the rate of return is outmatched by the sums spent on it?
Its why the cheapest option is always used, especially in rural areas. Of course there are plenty of exceptions to that rule where even FTTP has been rolled out. But by and large BT or its delinqent Openreach are not going pay for expensive upgrades without a wedge of cash to subsidise it. Do the arse end of all of this, rural areas are being upgraded to FTTC mostly and a majority of that is done through public subsidy from BDUK. Why should the taxpayer being subsidising the cost of broadband for those whole live in areas where the cost of upgrades are uneconomical to a company like BT? |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,881
|
Quote:
BT has already demonstrated that it's not looking at the bigger picture - whether it's in the most profitable areas or the arse end of nowhere - they always go for short sighted bodges that will cost more in the long run. The VDSL rollout has barely started to wind down and they're already preparing to obsolete it with G.fast (and not even from the pole/DP, so most of the benefit won't be realised)
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,881
|
Quote:
Yeah I only got mine because of BDUK. If it wasn't for them I'd still be on 5.5Mb. I know some people in the city who are in the wrong streets who can neither get cable or fibre. Yes same thing but everyone refers cable Virgin which goes past their street.
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 1,973
|
Indeed, though try downloading huge games and updates on the PS4 on 5.5Mb. 48 - 72 hours. Versus 3 - 6 hours on FTTC. 24 - 47+GB downloads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 377
|
Quote:
I'm not bitchy or bitter about public money being used to rollout superfast broadband to those in rural areas. Its become a utility now and having the internet is a must, doing your shopping, banking etc. Seeing as BT has the monopoly Ofcom or the Govt could mandate BT has a USO of 24Mb, that way it brings everyone where possible a connection in which would at least meet some of the needs for everyday folk.
Funnily enough, something like BDUK - the government compensates OR for providing un-economical FTTC cabinets. Just because OR will now be semi independant doesn't mean that their service will be any better or the cost of investing is any more economic. Indeed there is an argument that over the next couple of years it will be worse as management time is given over to splitting the company from BT rather than actually running the business. Brian |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,454
|
Quote:
That maybe the case but tell me which company or business would invest in areas that are uneconomical or where the rate of return is outmatched by the sums spent on it?
Its why the cheapest option is always used, especially in rural areas. Of course there are plenty of exceptions to that rule where even FTTP has been rolled out. But by and large BT or its delinqent Openreach are not going pay for expensive upgrades without a wedge of cash to subsidise it. Do the arse end of all of this, rural areas are being upgraded to FTTC mostly and a majority of that is done through public subsidy from BDUK. Why should the taxpayer being subsidising the cost of broadband for those whole live in areas where the cost of upgrades are uneconomical to a company like BT? We raise taxes nationally for our police, courts, health, education we don't discriminate if someone is living in a rural area if they need an operation, a police enquiry or taught at school. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,187
|
Quote:
Because previous to BT being privatised the government should have made it a condition that all areas were covered even rural areas.
Quote:
The privatisation was a shambles
I suspect you don't remember how much worse it was before.Quote:
We raise taxes nationally for our police, courts, health, education we don't discriminate if someone is living in a rural area if they need an operation, a police enquiry or taught at school.
There's a difference between need and want. Some people may want superfast broadband, but many don't care, and even fewer need it. Why should everyone's taxes be increased to pay for your gaming?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Scotland, Dunfermline Area
Posts: 10,698
|
ADSL never even came to me area until the early 2000s and the first desktop PC I got in mid 1999 was a Tiny PC just before Time tane over the Tiny company and PC was set up to use dial up services only not ADSL. First PC started playing up with in the fist 18 months if I remember.
It was not until I got my second desktop PC a Dell back in 2005 that I moved to the old basic 2mb ADSL than 6 or 7 months later upgraded to up to 8mb ADSL and at the time speed only increased by 1.5mb/1.6mb. I have been on BT Infinity fibre since about Easter time 2011. Speed has improved since than. I still know a few family friends from mums side of the family just over a mile or so north of Falkirk and they still cant get fibre as the two green cabs nearest them have still not been upgraded and they are lucky if they get speeds of over 4mb 97% of the time. I do think improvement of the broadband network as a whole needs done as we now using it a lot more than just for surfing the web and emails. The days are long gone when getting a speed of at lest 2mb was classed as fine. About 70% of what I now do in the house now uses the BT infinity fiber in some way. I would also say that BT Infinity is about 96%/97% reliable. You will never get an ISP that gives a full 100% reliable service. Darren |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 1,973
|
Quote:
BT was privatised in 1984, that was more than 10 years before the first ADSL standard was agreed, let alone domestic fibre being considered!
I suspect you don't remember how much worse it was before. There's a difference between need and want. Some people may want superfast broadband, but many don't care, and even fewer need it. Why should everyone's taxes be increased to pay for your gaming? A lot of wasted electricity for something you don't supposedly need and don't get me started on regular ADSL when someone or two were on and freakin Youtube etc buffers like hell. If we don't need it why does Japan have 1 - 8GB internet speeds? After all everything is movie, music, streaming, games, OS releases and updates, tablet OS releases and updates that eats away bandwidth that can take a very long time on a slow connection. Let alone working with companies remotely or you're sending your large projects and work to them while your upload speeds are dire. Or worse, BT freaking cut you off out of stupidity. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 14
|
Just a thought, has anyone came across this web entry http://www.techradar.com/news/world-...n-1990-1224784
Fortunately I have a good download speed on FTTC Plumbersmate |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:01.



