Print

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

[Chrysalis]

Because they have no facts to back up their allegations .......... for example "BT's service levels being close to the worst in the World". Complete and utter made-up drivel.

Again, I would refer the readership to the in-depth blog written by Ignitionet, that is riddled with factual debate and probable outcomes, pro and anti-split. Coupled with W3 and Kitz's own factual input, it addresses the reality of the situation but in a constructive manner ......... not by throwing out ignorant quotes like the one mentioned at the start of this post. 

Isn't made up.

Although i should have said "developed world".

BS if you cannot even acknowledge openreach is poor then you havent even made the first step into improving the company.  So my take is you got no proposal for improvement because you think there doesnt need to be an improvement, am I right?

All I am seeing from you is patting people on the back who are against the split and trying to discredit everyone else.

Since my work has me dealing with people around europe and america I have an idea what type of services consumers get for fixed line broadband in those countries.

here is a few facts anyway.

Approximately 90% of new line installations, which require an Openreach engineer to attend, take 10 calendar days or longer while almost one in ten installations takes longer than 30 days;
Openreach changes the agreed installation date for Sky customers on average around 12,500 times a month. Given Sky customers represent approximately one third of all those on the Openreach network, this would imply that c.37,500 households are affected each month in the UK;20
Openreach misses over 500 appointments each month to install new lines for Sky customers and fails to complete a further 4,000 jobs per month (which could equate to approximately 1,500 appointments and 12,000 jobs across the UK);
Fault rates across Openreach's network increased by 50% between 2009 and 2012, the last year for which reliable data is publicly available; and
Openreach's performance in fixing faults is consistently below the targets set out in agreements with service providers

[Chrysalis]

Why are the pro-separation people saying that BT is rubbish? (I'm assuming that they are saying such.)

Not necessarily BT as a whole, but I believe openreach as it is ran at the moment is in a poor state.

I am still waiting for proposals from the anti split people at what should be done to resolve the problem without a split.  As all is happening is reasons been given for not to split because of threats carried out by the incumbent.  They cosnider that a reason alone to not split?

I am talking from the perspective of an end user, I couldnt give a toss how happy CP's are with openreach.

[Black Sheep]

To be totally honest and frank ..... I've just got home from a damned good weekend. Your thoughts on what will happen really doesn't have any bearing on the lifestyle I have, and continue to enjoy. You are a 'Glass half-empty' type of person in my opinion. This will always show in your posts on here, or other forums.

In a nutshell, I genuinely cannot be ar5sed with you or your thoughts, life is really for living and if you wish to spend it on a virtual forum arguing about stuff you have no insight to, the crack on. Me I'll be busy elsewhere,

[gt94sss2]

Ownership by an ISPs' council sounds attractive to me.

While superficially, it sounds like an attactive idea - in practice its actually a terrible one. It gives no incentives for other firms to build infrastructure, disadvantages those who already have infrastructure and effectively creates a monopoly/cartel.

Given that all ISPs have very different objectives and aims in the telephony market, as well as balance sheets - it would also cripple their ability to fund investment etc. - being forced only to do things that they can all agree on.

Better would be an independent Openreach - but even that would be problematic - frankly likely to make the situation worse than it would otherwise be for years before started to get better - and even then it would be worse for the public than if it remained connected to BT.

[gt94sss2]

Isn't made up.

Although i should have said "developed world".

Since my work has me dealing with people around europe and america I have an idea what type of services consumers get for fixed line broadband in those countries.

Having actually lived in a number of developed countries including the USA and Japan - as well as having dealings with people globally , I can assure you the position in the UK is not the worst in the "developed world" by a long way - either in service levels, price or the fixed line broadband services which are available to the vast majority of their population.

here is a few facts anyway.

With respect - those are not facts as such but appear to be a copy and paste from a Sky press release issued last year. As with any such press release, its designed to influence by picking data to support their specific position and not giving a fair balanced overall picture.

A more upto date representation - if not fairer - would be the 3 infographics on this Openreach page

Note, I am not saying the position in the UK could not get better - it could - but the way I would perhaps suggest would not gain favour from the large ISPs.

But neither would fully separating Openreach from the rest of BT achieve this aim nor be in the wider interests of UK plc. In fact, I think that would be more disruptive and les effective from some of the things I can think of (but which would never happen)

And for the avoidance of doubt, I should say I have never worked for BT etc..

[Bowdon]

What is to stop other ISP's, especially the big ones, to start installing their own fibre, or fttp networks? Is there any reason why they are bound to go through Openreach?

All of my fights have been with the ISP's. By the time I get contact with Openreach they are always very efficient in dealing with the problem.

But my question is, why can't Sky invest more in building full fibre. They have been involved with FTTP projects in the past.

It seems that some ISP's have an agenda and instead of taking some of the blame themselves they just lump it all on BT / OR.

I'm getting sick of people in powerful positions playing the weak card. If they have a genuine issue with OR then start laying fibre pipes down themselves.

[Chrysalis]

To be totally honest and frank ..... I've just got home from a damned good weekend. Your thoughts on what will happen really doesn't have any bearing on the lifestyle I have, and continue to enjoy. You are a 'Glass half-empty' type of person in my opinion. This will always show in your posts on here, or other forums.

In a nutshell, I genuinely cannot be ar5sed with you or your thoughts, life is really for living and if you wish to spend it on a virtual forum arguing about stuff you have no insight to, the crack on. Me I'll be busy elsewhere,

I am sorry to hear that you cannot take this seriously black sheep, you are coming across somewhat childish clearly not interested in anything other then the well being of BT.

[Chrysalis]

Isn't made up.

Although i should have said "developed world".

Since my work has me dealing with people around europe and america I have an idea what type of services consumers get for fixed line broadband in those countries.

Having actually lived in a number of developed countries including the USA and Japan - as well as having dealings with people globally , I can assure you the position in the UK is not the worst in the "developed world" by a long way - either in service levels, price or the fixed line broadband services which are available to the vast majority of their population.

here is a few facts anyway.

With respect - those are not facts as such but appear to be a copy and paste from a Sky press release issued last year. As with any such press release, its designed to influence by picking data to support their specific position and not giving a fair balanced overall picture.

A more upto date representation - if not fairer - would be the 3 infographics on this Openreach page

Note, I am not saying the position in the UK could not get better - it could - but the way I would perhaps suggest would not gain favour from the large ISPs.

But neither would fully separating Openreach from the rest of BT achieve this aim nor be in the wider interests of UK plc. In fact, I think that would be more disruptive and les effective from some of the things I can think of (but which would never happen)

And for the avoidance of doubt, I should say I have never worked for BT etc..

yes sky is the source of those stats. The only reason I picked sky's data is because they the only recent source of hard numbers I could find.

Have you any reason to believe they are inaccurate? as far as I can see noone else within the industry (including BT) has challenged those figures.

There is a mixture of speculation and facts in sky's document, I dont think these numbers are speculation.

If you have a source of information that suggests they wrong you are free to provide it here.

[Chrysalis]

What is to stop other ISP's, especially the big ones, to start installing their own fibre, or fttp networks? Is there any reason why they are bound to go through Openreach?

All of my fights have been with the ISP's. By the time I get contact with Openreach they are always very efficient in dealing with the problem.

But my question is, why can't Sky invest more in building full fibre. They have been involved with FTTP projects in the past.

It seems that some ISP's have an agenda and instead of taking some of the blame themselves they just lump it all on BT / OR.

I'm getting sick of people in powerful positions playing the weak card. If they have a genuine issue with OR then start laying fibre pipes down themselves.

I think the reason is they dont want to duplicate an existing network. Which would be a disaster if it happened.

e.g. if sky rollout FTTP in leics, then openreach decide to do it a month later (as they did with adsl when small providers rolled out adsl in non adsl areas), but openreach can do it a lower cost because they have existing ducts and poles to use.  In addition openreach already have BT wholesale as a large customer, and as such have a more higher likelyhood of selling the services.  From vodafone, sky, talktalk point of view this makes much more financial sense to have openreach rollout FTTP instead, but BT dont agree and want to focus on g.fast instead.

In addition with the separate rollout they would be funding their own engineer's on top of paying for openreach's engineers, whilst if it was all one entity there would be no duplication of resources.  Remember BT under the proposals would still be a shareholder of openreach, they just wouldnt be the sole shareholder.

My own personal speculation is once they have direct control of openreach staff and as such can tackle the poor performance of openreach e.g. the missed appointments, poor attitude to faults and so on, it may in the future become more likely that end users have a more direct relationship with openreach as well.  I can see more upsides than downsides.

Of course the issue is there would be short term pain, but as a country we need to start thinking long term instead of just the short term.

[Starman]

The Register posted a story from Labour's shadow digital minister - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02/15/ofcom_must_tackle_monopolistic_bt_interview_chi_onwurah_mp/

Just reads as more political soundbites.

[Black Sheep]

To be totally honest and frank ..... I've just got home from a damned good weekend. Your thoughts on what will happen really doesn't have any bearing on the lifestyle I have, and continue to enjoy. You are a 'Glass half-empty' type of person in my opinion. This will always show in your posts on here, or other forums.

In a nutshell, I genuinely cannot be ar5sed with you or your thoughts, life is really for living and if you wish to spend it on a virtual forum arguing about stuff you have no insight to, the crack on. Me I'll be busy elsewhere,

I am sorry to hear that you cannot take this seriously black sheep, you are coming across somewhat childish clearly not interested in anything other then the well being of BT.

I will concur that I posted whilst 'Under the influence' yesterday, and as such the posting came from my heart rather than my head, so to speak.

You clearly don't read my posts, Chrysalis, or choose to only digest the information you wish to, or put your own warped slant on it. I've said on here many, many times that OR do get things wrong. This is bound to happen in a company as large as ours, and with an end-user base in it's millions. However, people like you choose to only highlight the issues that are in the very low pecentages when looking at the big picture. You seem totally incapable of doing this ??

Also you seldomly, if ever, produce facts .... opting rather to use the 'My mates Nan' pub-story ..... or something similar.

This isn't about what I would like to happen regarding the split, it's certainly not about what you want either. It's about what is best for the UK going forward and YET AGAIN I will mention the blog from Ignitionet, it covered EVERYTHING from an impartial stance.

The most laughable 'fact' you have produced though, is that you are in a great position to comment based upon the fact you have a natter every now and again with people in other countries ?? Ludicrous.

BT are now running a series of adverts based around the split ...... here's what we got e-mailed about it. I'll try to put the actual links up later, haven't time now.


Over the weekend you may have seen some ads in the national press that BT Group are running which share our ambition for broadband and why Openreach should remain part of BT.

This is public, visible support for the fantastic work that everyone in Openreach has been doing to build Britain’s connected future.

There are two ads. One is called ‘There’s no time to lose’. This sets out our commitment to get the whole of the UK access to superfast broadband and how we will ensure the UK maintains its position as the largest digital economy of the G20 countries.
The second one is called ‘A few home truths about Britain’s broadband’ and dispels a number of myths that you may have read in the press over the past few weeks. It makes clear that the UK is a global leader in broadband, not a laggard as some reports have suggested and it also explains why separating Openreach from BT would not improve the network.

Take a look at a more detailed BT Group view on the UK’s digital future here.

The ads will continue to run over the next couple of weeks in most national newspapers and online. Please look out for them, familiarise yourself with the content should you be asked about them by end customers and share with friends and family.
Thank you for everything you are doing to build Britain’s connected future.

Clive

[Dray]

There's no need to ridicule posters here is there? If we all started, where would it end?

[Black Sheep]

So sorry Dray and I do agree, however having only been a member for a relatively short time, you may not be aware of the fact that myself and Chrysalis don't see eye-to-eye on most things, nor ever will do. It doesn't matter how many times you answer the guy, he reposts the same question in a different manner or chooses to ignore ones offerings.
 
If you look back through Chrysalis posting history, you will see it can be quite inflammatory also a lot of the time. I am not an angel, I don't do the gentle-approach with folk like this I'm afraid.

My failing.

[Black Sheep]

Links from above post that I now do have time to post  .

1) https://intra.bt.com/bt/group/PublishingImages/ad-1.jpg
2) https://intra.bt.com/bt/group/PublishingImages/ad-2.jpg
3) http://btplc.com/UKDigitalFuture/

All fact based info.

[Dray]

Those https://intra... appear to be on your Intranet, not Internet