| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Mortimer
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:19 pm Post subject: Re: BT plans UK's largest ever investment in super-fast broa |
 |
|
"Michael R N Dolbear" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:01c8e73d$a65ea160$LocalHost@default...
| Quote: |
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote
In the days of the GPO, there was a mandate that anyone in the
British
isles who wanted a telephone was entitled to have it at a fixed rate.
Even if it meant stringing a radio link across a few miles of north
sea.
Google USO (EUSpeak "Universal Service Obligation) for what replaced
it.
"service" in USO now includes narrowband modem usage.
|
Oh big deal ;-) That's generous of them. They are actually obliged to
provide narrowband modem usage - wow!
There really does need to be an obligation on BT to supply some level of
broadband to everyone in range of the exchange who asks for it, given that
they are the de facto monopoly supplier except in places that have cable or
a wireless internet scheme. They should be obliged to upgrade their lines
(both in terms of quality and sufficient number of pairs) and to remove any
non-compatible cabling.
The USO should be a *moveable* obligation which changes as new technology
emerges, not which is static at the level of phone, fax and dial-up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
The Natural Philosopher
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:02 am Post subject: Re: BT plans UK's largest ever investment in super-fast broa |
|
|
PeeGee wrote:
| Quote: |
Mortimer wrote:
"Michael R N Dolbear" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:01c8e73d$a65ea160$LocalHost@default...
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote
In the days of the GPO, there was a mandate that anyone in the
British
isles who wanted a telephone was entitled to have it at a fixed rate.
Even if it meant stringing a radio link across a few miles of north
sea.
Google USO (EUSpeak "Universal Service Obligation) for what replaced
it.
"service" in USO now includes narrowband modem usage.
Oh big deal ;-) That's generous of them. They are actually obliged to
provide narrowband modem usage - wow!
There really does need to be an obligation on BT to supply some level
of broadband to everyone in range of the exchange who asks for it,
given that they are the de facto monopoly supplier except in places
that have cable or a wireless internet scheme. They should be obliged
to upgrade their lines (both in terms of quality and sufficient number
of pairs) and to remove any non-compatible cabling.
The USO should be a *moveable* obligation which changes as new
technology emerges, not which is static at the level of phone, fax and
dial-up.
But should they be allowed to charge commercially viable prices for
providing such a service and not have to subsidise competitors who want
to use their infrastructure or should they continue to be forced to
fully follow the existing situation where competition only serves high
profit, low cost areas or is provided use of the infrastructure at
non-commercial rates?
Note: the government definition of a "level playing field" is based on
the old Yeovil Town football ground :-)
That is the whole frickin problem with BT. You cant privatise a de facto |
monopoly without a regulator, and then the argument becomes one of what
the regulations are going to be. And who is going to subsidise the
uneconomic bits.
Frankly the last mile of copper ought to be locally owned and run as a
not for profit service subsidised by the local councils Who would not
hand over all the local taxes to the government.. And the backhauls
should be the same, but under the control of the government centrally.
Along with the national grid by and large.
That would lead to plenty of space for IPs and telcos to use that
infrastructure in a competitive way, like road hauliers use the road
network. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
PeeGee
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:02 am Post subject: Re: BT plans UK's largest ever investment in super-fast broa |
|
|
Mortimer wrote:
| Quote: |
"Michael R N Dolbear" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:01c8e73d$a65ea160$LocalHost@default...
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote
In the days of the GPO, there was a mandate that anyone in the
British
isles who wanted a telephone was entitled to have it at a fixed rate.
Even if it meant stringing a radio link across a few miles of north
sea.
Google USO (EUSpeak "Universal Service Obligation) for what replaced
it.
"service" in USO now includes narrowband modem usage.
Oh big deal ;-) That's generous of them. They are actually obliged to
provide narrowband modem usage - wow!
There really does need to be an obligation on BT to supply some level of
broadband to everyone in range of the exchange who asks for it, given that
they are the de facto monopoly supplier except in places that have cable or
a wireless internet scheme. They should be obliged to upgrade their lines
(both in terms of quality and sufficient number of pairs) and to remove any
non-compatible cabling.
The USO should be a *moveable* obligation which changes as new technology
emerges, not which is static at the level of phone, fax and dial-up.
|
But should they be allowed to charge commercially viable prices for
providing such a service and not have to subsidise competitors who want
to use their infrastructure or should they continue to be forced to
fully follow the existing situation where competition only serves high
profit, low cost areas or is provided use of the infrastructure at
non-commercial rates?
Note: the government definition of a "level playing field" is based on
the old Yeovil Town football ground :-)
--
PeeGee
"Nothing should be able to load itself onto a computer without the
knowledge or consent of the computer user. Software should also be able
to be removed from a computer easily."
Peter Cullen, Microsoft Chief Privacy Strategist (Computing 18 Aug 05) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
George Weston
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:05 pm Post subject: Re: BT plans UK's largest ever investment in super-fast broa |
|
|
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
news:1216288783.15256.0@proxy02.news.clara.net...
| Quote: |
PeeGee wrote:
Mortimer wrote:
"Michael R N Dolbear" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:01c8e73d$a65ea160$LocalHost@default...
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote
In the days of the GPO, there was a mandate that anyone in the
British
isles who wanted a telephone was entitled to have it at a fixed rate.
Even if it meant stringing a radio link across a few miles of north
sea.
Google USO (EUSpeak "Universal Service Obligation) for what replaced
it.
"service" in USO now includes narrowband modem usage.
Oh big deal ;-) That's generous of them. They are actually obliged to
provide narrowband modem usage - wow!
There really does need to be an obligation on BT to supply some level of
broadband to everyone in range of the exchange who asks for it, given
that they are the de facto monopoly supplier except in places that have
cable or a wireless internet scheme. They should be obliged to upgrade
their lines (both in terms of quality and sufficient number of pairs)
and to remove any non-compatible cabling.
The USO should be a *moveable* obligation which changes as new
technology emerges, not which is static at the level of phone, fax and
dial-up.
But should they be allowed to charge commercially viable prices for
providing such a service and not have to subsidise competitors who want
to use their infrastructure or should they continue to be forced to fully
follow the existing situation where competition only serves high profit,
low cost areas or is provided use of the infrastructure at non-commercial
rates?
Note: the government definition of a "level playing field" is based on
the old Yeovil Town football ground :-)
That is the whole frickin problem with BT. You cant privatise a de facto
monopoly without a regulator, and then the argument becomes one of what
the regulations are going to be. And who is going to subsidise the
uneconomic bits.
Frankly the last mile of copper ought to be locally owned and run as a not
for profit service subsidised by the local councils Who would not hand
over all the local taxes to the government.. And the backhauls should be
the same, but under the control of the government centrally.
Along with the national grid by and large.
|
Which is now a PLC (like BT) - see:
http://www.nationalgrid.com/corporate/About+Us/Our+History/
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
The Natural Philosopher
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:04 pm Post subject: Re: BT plans UK's largest ever investment in super-fast broa |
|
|
George Weston wrote:
| Quote: |
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
news:1216288783.15256.0@proxy02.news.clara.net...
PeeGee wrote:
Mortimer wrote:
"Michael R N Dolbear" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:01c8e73d$a65ea160$LocalHost@default...
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote
In the days of the GPO, there was a mandate that anyone in the
British
isles who wanted a telephone was entitled to have it at a fixed rate.
Even if it meant stringing a radio link across a few miles of north
sea.
Google USO (EUSpeak "Universal Service Obligation) for what replaced
it.
"service" in USO now includes narrowband modem usage.
Oh big deal ;-) That's generous of them. They are actually obliged to
provide narrowband modem usage - wow!
There really does need to be an obligation on BT to supply some level of
broadband to everyone in range of the exchange who asks for it, given
that they are the de facto monopoly supplier except in places that have
cable or a wireless internet scheme. They should be obliged to upgrade
their lines (both in terms of quality and sufficient number of pairs)
and to remove any non-compatible cabling.
The USO should be a *moveable* obligation which changes as new
technology emerges, not which is static at the level of phone, fax and
dial-up.
But should they be allowed to charge commercially viable prices for
providing such a service and not have to subsidise competitors who want
to use their infrastructure or should they continue to be forced to fully
follow the existing situation where competition only serves high profit,
low cost areas or is provided use of the infrastructure at non-commercial
rates?
Note: the government definition of a "level playing field" is based on
the old Yeovil Town football ground :-)
That is the whole frickin problem with BT. You cant privatise a de facto
monopoly without a regulator, and then the argument becomes one of what
the regulations are going to be. And who is going to subsidise the
uneconomic bits.
Frankly the last mile of copper ought to be locally owned and run as a not
for profit service subsidised by the local councils Who would not hand
over all the local taxes to the government.. And the backhauls should be
the same, but under the control of the government centrally.
Along with the national grid by and large.
Which is now a PLC (like BT) - see:
http://www.nationalgrid.com/corporate/About+Us/Our+History/
|
Precisely. Neither should be.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Klunk
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:04 pm Post subject: Re: BT plans UK's largest ever investment in super-fast broa |
|
|
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 13:04:09 +0100, The Natural Philosopher passed an
empty day by writing:
| Quote: |
George Weston wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
news:1216288783.15256.0@proxy02.news.clara.net...
PeeGee wrote:
Mortimer wrote:
"Michael R N Dolbear" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:01c8e73d$a65ea160$LocalHost@default...
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> wrote
In the days of the GPO, there was a mandate that anyone in the
British
isles who wanted a telephone was entitled to have it at a fixed
rate.
Even if it meant stringing a radio link across a few miles of
north
sea.
Google USO (EUSpeak "Universal Service Obligation) for what
replaced it.
"service" in USO now includes narrowband modem usage.
Oh big deal ;-) That's generous of them. They are actually obliged
to provide narrowband modem usage - wow!
There really does need to be an obligation on BT to supply some
level of broadband to everyone in range of the exchange who asks for
it, given that they are the de facto monopoly supplier except in
places that have cable or a wireless internet scheme. They should be
obliged to upgrade their lines (both in terms of quality and
sufficient number of pairs) and to remove any non-compatible
cabling.
The USO should be a *moveable* obligation which changes as new
technology emerges, not which is static at the level of phone, fax
and dial-up.
But should they be allowed to charge commercially viable prices for
providing such a service and not have to subsidise competitors who
want to use their infrastructure or should they continue to be forced
to fully follow the existing situation where competition only serves
high profit, low cost areas or is provided use of the infrastructure
at non-commercial rates?
Note: the government definition of a "level playing field" is based
on the old Yeovil Town football ground :-)
That is the whole frickin problem with BT. You cant privatise a de
facto monopoly without a regulator, and then the argument becomes one
of what the regulations are going to be. And who is going to subsidise
the uneconomic bits.
Frankly the last mile of copper ought to be locally owned and run as a
not for profit service subsidised by the local councils Who would not
hand over all the local taxes to the government.. And the backhauls
should be the same, but under the control of the government centrally.
Along with the national grid by and large.
Which is now a PLC (like BT) - see:
http://www.nationalgrid.com/corporate/About+Us/Our+History/
Precisely. Neither should be.
George
|
And if they were still in public hands we would still have dial phones
and Prestel.
If people are unhappy with what BT do, they are allowed to set up their
own network, dig up streets, provide customer connections etc.
I don't accept that other people should subsidise broadband for people
that want 'faster' services. This is a commercial, non essential service
at the end of the day. I hear plenty of small home businesses moan but
when you ask them to give away their stuff at a loss, or require a 200
year return on it they tend to shut up.
--
begin oefixed_in_2005.exe |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
The Natural Philosopher
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:12 am Post subject: Re: BT plans UK's largest ever investment in super-fast broa |
|
|
Klunk wrote:
| Quote: |
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 13:04:09 +0100, The Natural Philosopher passed an
empty day by writing:
George Weston wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
Frankly the last mile of copper ought to be locally owned and run as a
not for profit service subsidised by the local councils Who would not
hand over all the local taxes to the government.. And the backhauls
should be the same, but under the control of the government centrally.
Along with the national grid by and large.
Which is now a PLC (like BT) - see:
http://www.nationalgrid.com/corporate/About+Us/Our+History/
Precisely. Neither should be.
George
And if they were still in public hands we would still have dial phones
and Prestel.
|
I didn't say they should be state *run*, merely state - or council -
*subsiisded*, on a regulated and not for profit basis.
Where profit opportunities in a COMPETITIVE market exist, and thats
definitely true of ISPs and telephone companies, then I have no problem
with private companies run for profit: Where a de factyo monol;oy
exists, then at soe level that monoploy has to be regulated.
| Quote: |
If people are unhappy with what BT do, they are allowed to set up their
own network, dig up streets, provide customer connections etc.
|
Actually, that is very very hard to do.
Also, BT has an unfair advantage in that its wayleaves and rights were
granted years ago under state ownership. Its infrastructure already
exusts,paid fr by te taxpayers of years ago.
| Quote: |
I don't accept that other people should subsidise broadband for people
that want 'faster' services.
|
Thats not the primary issue: the more problematic issue is whether other
people should subsidise broadband at all, for people in remote places
where few subscribers exist. It costs the same more or less to lay one
mile of twisted pair or one mile of terabit optical fibre.
You have the situation where the subscriber wants to rent bandwidth, but
the income stream is totally separate from the cost stream, which is all
about capital investment.
to be fair, a connection SHOULD cost you about 7 grand, and then the
rest would be ree, apart from support calls charged at £100 an hour.
Your connection charges are essentially interest on the 7 grand that BT
has loaned you in order to have access to the cable.and insurance
against teh support call you will one day make.
This is a commercial, non essential service
I think its rapidly beciming an essential service. I would not be able
to live as I do withot it.
Any more than if I did not have access to a road.
| Quote: |
at the end of the day. I hear plenty of small home businesses moan but
when you ask them to give away their stuff at a loss, or require a 200
year return on it they tend to shut up.
|
Thats not the situation. BT can borrow money against future earnings and
finance expansion, but what the country doesn't want is them leveraging
a de-facto monopoly, and an infrastructure gifted to them at
privatization, to excessive profit.
Hence the local loop SHOULD be separated from everything else, like
Network rail is, and run as a not for profit regulated but otherwise
commercial business. With whatever subsidies the (local) taxpayers deem
appropriate.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
naza
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:16 am Post subject: Re: BT plans UK's largest ever investment in super-fast broa |
|
|
Frankly the last mile of copper ought to be locally owned and run as a
| Quote: |
not for profit service subsidised by the local councils Who would not
hand over all the local taxes to the government.. And the backhauls
should be the same, but under the control of the government centrally.
|
And let the politicians at the phone network as well. That can only do
more harm then good. BT runs a good network. They own all of it and
they maintain it, with money they have, which is not wholly from the
tax payer and the be honest they do a good job. I mean some road go
unmaintained for years, if a crackle appears on your phone line and
your with BT they will sort it fairly quickly and swiftly.
If you expect local loop to the be controlled locally then you may
well be causing problems for yourself. At current when BT are asked to
do something like fibre its nationally, not just in your local area,
it does not matter that they try to work not to do that, everyone is
included in a proposal. it may be that you live in a village with lots
of elderly people who don't thing having Fibre is very important, but
you may need it for daily work. Then you would have some problems
getting money for Fibre. It would turn it into a postcode service,
much like virgin media's cable rollout. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
George Weston
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:27 am Post subject: Re: BT plans UK's largest ever investment in super-fast broa |
|
|
"naza" <naza911@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:26f0f2c4-acc8-420d-a363-43d87f19d050@h1g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
Frankly the last mile of copper ought to be locally owned and run as a
not for profit service subsidised by the local councils Who would not
hand over all the local taxes to the government.. And the backhauls
should be the same, but under the control of the government centrally.
And let the politicians at the phone network as well. That can only do
more harm then good. BT runs a good network. They own all of it and
they maintain it, with money they have, which is not wholly from the
tax payer and the be honest they do a good job. I mean some road go
unmaintained for years, if a crackle appears on your phone line and
your with BT they will sort it fairly quickly and swiftly.
If you expect local loop to the be controlled locally then you may
well be causing problems for yourself. At current when BT are asked to
do something like fibre its nationally, not just in your local area,
it does not matter that they try to work not to do that, everyone is
included in a proposal. it may be that you live in a village with lots
of elderly people who don't thing having Fibre is very important, but
you may need it for daily work. Then you would have some problems
getting money for Fibre. It would turn it into a postcode service,
much like virgin media's cable rollout.
|
Agreed.
Having had a long career with Post Office Telephones / British Telecom /
BT - and got out when the time was right! - I can remember when the
government of the day (of whatever colour) would continually muck about with
the company's funding, dependant upon the fiscal system of the day, the tax
position, inflation, whatever. This would result in frequently starving the
company of cash in difficult times, resulting in long waiting lists for
service, due to insufficient cash for line plant and exchange equipment.
Also, when it was a government department, it wasn't allowed to borrow money
on the outside market, which is an essential requirement for a large plc.
I remember some farcical situations when I was an exchange equipment
planner.
We would plan for equipping exchanges depending on the current sales
forecast.
However, if the proposed equipment cost more than the current budget, we had
to adjust the sales forecast downwards to meet it, resulting in "planned
waiting lists"!
This is the equivalent of driving at 40mph in a 30mph area and then
adjusting your speedometer so that it reads 30. Everything's all right then,
folks!
I now work for our local county council (nothing to do with IT or telecoms,
thank goodness), where similar budget restrictions apply. If the cash isn't
available for a particular job, and it doesn't appear on the "priority
list", then it doesn't get done - full stop! The nasty politics bit comes in
when deciding the priority list.
Regulate BT by all means but don't let it fall back into the hands of
government - national or local - or we'll be back in the bad old days.
George |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
73 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
