BT/OR

[#1]

Ofcom , has told BT that OR should be separate But stay within BT group , and needs to concentrate more on customers

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36891446

http://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2016/making-digital-communications-work-openreach-bt/

[#2]

Lets hope something is done about this as without doubt BT is not providing the service it should, especially in rural areas like mine here in west Wales. Reminds me of years back when my company supplied us with radio pagers (remember those?) and when asked why they did not work in many areas across Wales we were told "it's not cheap to bleep sheep"

Maybe it's not cheap to provide them with decent broadband either! 

[#3]

---

Minivanman wrote:

Maybe it's not cheap to provide them with decent broadband either! 

---

it's not.
the problem is the end-user doesn't want to pay a price for it. they want it at next-to-nothing, or free for 6 months etc etc

[#4]

Absolutely not the case as far as I am concerned so OK, I want a decent broadband connection but y'know what, in my area you cannot get it at any price..... unless you are suggesting I pay through the nose for a satellite link.

What's a fair price anyway? 

[#5]

a fair price would be what it costs to actually supply you with the service.
clearly it's going to cost more to provide to to someone out in the middle of nowhere compared to someone in the city.
the cost to you should not be subsidised by those who live in area cheaper to supply.

and yes, if a satellite link is the only way to get then you pay through the nose for it.
broadband connectivity (no matter what the government like to tell you) is not a divine right and not in the same bracket as providing running water or electricity.

[#6]

Not a 'divine' right, but certainly a right if we as people are to engage effectively with society.

Would your argument hold if it came to the provision of roads or a bus service? I doubt it. Would you deny effective access to government, health care, social media, education..... this list is almost endless.

I can remember as a kid growing up in the 60s and my old dad offering me some old brown football boots to use at school at a time when all the other kids were wearing those then new lightweight ones. I had no 'right' to a decent pair of boots but I would have been made to look a right idiot if I'd clumped out onto the field in his old pair! 

[#7]

you seem to be talking nonsense now.
football boots? access to health care? roads?

we're talking about internet access here supplied by a private company.
if it costs BT double to provide a line to someone then that person should pay more to get the service

the sooner people start paying the actual real costs for something the sooner companies expand and provide that service.
as i said, the problem is that people want everything for nothing. too quick to call up and threaten to cancel just to get a cheaper deal.

[#8]

OK back to square one.

I am willing to pay a fair price for a decent internet connection here in west Wales, so where is it?

[#9]

what do you deem a fair price?
and what you deem as "decent"?

[#10]

@chenks76

you realise that bt uses "cost " as an excuse not to upgrade areas when in truth its more expensive to keep running the old junk that's been in place for over a decade right ?

the new gear is low power consumption half the size and gives 20x more access speed (at a minimum) which all adds up to it costing less over a  36 month period to replace the gear and old copper wires with fibre whilst they keep charging the same price than it does to actually keep the current hardware running... they are planning to remove the last mile copper wherever possible because of this and the recycle value of the materials they will actually make money by doing it in the short term and the long term, sure in a few places fibre optics is non viable option and there stuck with copper wires the biggest problem is local opposition to getting roads /gardens etc dug up and having "that monstrosity on the street"  that's what pushes costs up fighting law suits which means instead of a 3 year minium profit point there looking at closer to 20 years to achieve profit on each install.... what we need is Ofcom to liase with other parts of the government and push for a change in the laws that allow utility companies the right to undertake such works without the ability to be blocked legally once the local planning council has given ageed the details.

[#11]

---

chenks76 wrote:

the sooner people start paying the actual real costs for something the sooner companies expand and provide that service.

---

That's a radical idea.  The cost / charging model would though be a bit of a headache.

What do you suggest - cost based on miles from the exchange?  How many cabinets a circuit routes through?  Do you think that similar charging models should be applied to electricity, gas, water, postage and parcel delivery charges?

I'm guessing you live in the heart of a city.  How about charging in proportion to service delivery - for example, pay more for high speed and reliability (post arrives in the morning and you get no power cuts at all) and less for slow speed poor reliability (post might arrive before 4pm and an assurance of several power cuts a year)?  In case you are wondering, I do not live in a REMOTE rural area.

[#12]

@Minivanman

Not sure if this is worth exploring but if you look up cybermoor networks it gives detail of a partially community built fibre optic network in Cumbria which was partially funded by EFDRA and DEFRA.

Not sure what funding is available in your area but if there were enough people wanting the service this could be one way forward.

[#13]

As predicted when appointed Sharon White is as much use as an ash tray on a motor bike.  This is a half baked solution.  Ofcom is useless.

If it is too difficult to hive off BT Openreach from the rest of the BT group, then have the BT group divest if self of the retail divisions - make BT retail and PlusNET independent of BT.

Just how hard can it be to separate the infrastructure provision from the retail operators?

Gas industry has done it.  Centrica are responsible for the distribution network right up to your meter.  If there's a fault in the network, you report it direct to the network providers - Centrica - not the retaile you buy your gas from.

The BT model is broken and Ofcom has again failed to remedy the problem ... due to having the wrong (light weight) person in the driving seat.

[#14]

@gleneagles

Indeed yes, we had such a suggestion when we lived in rural France with the idea that the Commune would pay for a satellite dish which would then distribute the connection throughout the village. Never happend sad to say.

Here in my part of Wales (rural again!) there is a scheme whereby the Welsh government will pay for the supply and installation of satellite equipment to the tune of around £400 I think but with the proviso that BT are not able to provide high speed broadband before the end of 2016 - which they said they would do but, they also said in the past that it would be done by March 2014 - I have posted on this before by the way.

[#15]

---

Townman wrote:

---

chenks76 wrote:

the sooner people start paying the actual real costs for something the sooner companies expand and provide that service.

---

That's a radical idea.  The cost / charging model would though be a bit of a headache.

What do you suggest - cost based on miles from the exchange?  How many cabinets a circuit routes through?  Do you think that similar charging models should be applied to electricity, gas, water, postage and parcel delivery charges?

I'm guessing you live in the heart of a city.  How about charging in proportion to service delivery - for example, pay more for high speed and reliability (post arrives in the morning and you get no power cuts at all) and less for slow speed poor reliability (post might arrive before 4pm and an assurance of several power cuts a year)?  In case you are wondering, I do not live in a REMOTE rural area.

---

no i don't live in the heart of a city.

i live in a small town about 25 miles away from the nearest city.
electricty/gas/water are not comparable as they are deemed as essential services that is deemed as a right.

postage, yes we should start paying for what it actually costs then maybe we'd get a better end service.

in terms of this discussion, if it costs more to provide the service to a location then the end-user cost should take that into account.