Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[NewtronStar]

Well, it's all done with now. No going back. I'm a big believer in seeing the results, be that positive or negative, before judging things.
Otherwise, it's just an opinion at best.

If you said this acquisition will benefit the customers by lowering monthly charges and also making the line-rental half price then it would be a good day the only people who will see any benefit will be those share holders you know that to be true.

[Black Sheep]

Absolutely agree, it'll be great for shareholders, hopefully. As for the rest of what will happen, who knows ?? You don't, I don't ..... only those at the top of the business do ..... ergo, it's just an opinion.

[broadstairs]

Absolutely agree, it'll be great for shareholders, hopefully. As for the rest of what will happen, who knows ?? You don't, I don't ..... only those at the top of the business do ..... ergo, it's just an opinion.

Although you are correct it is an opinion, the point here is that just about every merger of this type in the past has NOT resulted in a better deal for consumers and I have no reason to believe that this one will be any different. Based on past experience you must be able to see why people are very skeptical about this one, it might just be no worse than before but I certainly dont see it being any better.

As to OR being part of BT to my mind it should NEVER have been allowed in the first place, it was the wrong decision and I dont think we are seeing any benefit from it being part of BT.

Stuart

[kitz]

>> f you said this acquisition will benefit the customers by lowering monthly charges and also making the line-rental half price

Wont happen.    Broadband is already sold for less than what it costs the providers.  The profit is in line rental and its that which subsidises DSL.
OFCOM fixes the BTw line rental prices, and even so if it was half price, then they would be operating at a loss.    I dont like how so many companies use line rental subsidisation and it only serves to confuse. 

People say BT are too big, but Sky isn't too far behind.    Sky is the major player wanting BT broken up.     

[sevenlayermuddle]

For those that see BT as a company run just for wealthy shareholders, why not cash in?   Become a shareholder, easily done with a few click of the mouse on various online brokers.   

Personally, with a small BT shareholding dating back to the original privatisation I'd advise caution, unless you've done all your homework and have very specific reasons for your beliefs.    They have had ups and downs in recent years.  But over that entire period, since privatisation, it is worth comparing share price vs indexes or inflation - form your own opinions.

[NewtronStar]

The profit is in line rental and its that which subsidises DSL.
OFCOM fixes the BTw line rental prices, and even so if it was half price, then they would be operating at a loss.

Why then does the line rental prices keep increasing each year I have never seen in my lifetime the line rental price fall unlike like say your oil for heating or electricity or petrol and council rates, that is what gets me BTw or Retail prices just keep on climbing.

Sure the oil producers are now operating at a loss but who cares as long as it's cheaper for the consumer 

[ryan2390]

I daresay I agree with those who think it could be a bad thing. EE are innovators and I have concerns that BT will stifle that innovation.

Conversely EE could have a positive effect on BT.

As has been said I will also wait and see what happens

[broadstairs]

People say BT are too big, but Sky isn't too far behind.    Sky is the major player wanting BT broken up.   

While I agree with this my point about BTOR needing to be separated from BT is because in fixed line terms they own the vast majority of the estate and therefore effectively control the supply of fixed line telephony and broadband market. Allowing one company to own this while supposedly competing with others who have no alternative but to use OR is just plain wrong. I simply do not accept that this can be 100% fair or 100% transparent, I'm not saying they deliberately do bad things but is just too easy for things to go awry. A separate company would allow the possibility to rebuild the trust of the public in this market operating fairly.

Stuart

[Dray]

A simple example is the way OR crippled G.INP because BT are supplying a modem/router that doesn't support it.

[Black Sheep]

A simple example is the way OR crippled G.INP because BT are supplying a modem/router that doesn't support it.

Surely that's an example to prove that the two are not in cahoots with each other, whispering in darkened corners, etc

[Dray]

To me, it shows that OR still works in BT's interest. OR crippled G.INP for everyone because BT don't support it.

[gt94sss2]

Why then does the line rental prices keep increasing each year I have never seen in my lifetime the line rental price fall unlike like say your oil for heating or electricity or petrol and council rates, that is what gets me BTw or Retail prices just keep on climbing.

The wholesale prices for line rental are falling as per Ofcom's price controls  - the retail line rental is increasing for two main reasons:

1) call revenue if falling;and
2) providers find it easier to raise line rental than broadband prices.

However, its possible to shop around and find providers who are charging less in line rental than the likes of Sky and BT.

[broadstairs]

A simple example is the way OR crippled G.INP because BT are supplying a modem/router that doesn't support it.

Surely that's an example to prove that the two are not in cahoots with each other, whispering in darkened corners, etc

If OR was a separate company they would have said to BT 'hard luck you fix your problem'.

Stuart

[gt94sss2]

A simple example is the way OR crippled G.INP because BT are supplying a modem/router that doesn't support it.

I thought OR actually did that as some of the FTTC modems OR supplied don't support G.INP properly not because BT Retail have issues.

Though both could be resolved with a firmware update.. its probably harder for Openreach as they don't want to support the FTTC routers they issued any longer

[kitz]

The profit is in line rental and its that which subsidises DSL.
OFCOM fixes the BTw line rental prices, and even so if it was half price, then they would be operating at a loss.

Why then does the line rental prices keep increasing each year I have never seen in my lifetime the line rental price fall unlike like say your oil for heating or electricity or petrol and council rates, that is what gets me BTw or Retail prices just keep on climbing.

Sure the oil producers are now operating at a loss but who cares as long as it's cheaper for the consumer 

Youre pointing the finger totally in the wrong direction. The wholesale prices are not climbing.

It is absolutely nothing to do with Openreach or Wholesale.   Blame the Service providers.  The basic price charged by Openreach/Wholesale has actually decreased over the past 10 years.  In 2006 the Service providers were charged £100-68.   Today they are charged £86.72 for line rental and its the ISPs who are making huge price increases.

Its the service providers who started offsetting broadband by line rental who are to blame for this one.  TalkTalk started the ball rolling with "Free broadband" if you take line rental. 
It is the service providers themselves who are hiking the line rental prices sky high [pun].

This is why I am so against price offsetting of broadband, most consumers dont look at the line rental cost and go for the headling 'Free broadband' or 'broadband for £2.99'. 

IMHO it would be far more useful if OFCOM investigated the Service Providers for price offsetting and would make things much simpler and cheaper for consumers.   Its the price offsetting which has helped to make the likes of Sky/TT bigger and why theres less of ISPs such as Zen in the market place.   

Attached below is the wholesale line rental costs for the past 10 years.