I understand what you saying, but I just consider that a weak argument for letting a telco off the hook, that they just "might" save this so called wasted money on what we want.
If we applied the same logic to other things, then we wouldnt fine criminals simply because the fines could be "spent on better things".
My speculation of where the money would come from is based on BT's circa 30 year history. I also speculate that the so called billions of wasted money is something grossly exaggerated to try and scare people into making ofcom back off.
This is why I say simply the fact something costs money should not be a relevant factor if something is regulated. There has to be a non financial reason given.
I expect ofcom have given BT many chances to come with a sound plan for future investment, they will have likely been given many opportunities to point out productive use of this money and have probably failed to do so.
