Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet United Kingdom News

BT Fiber Infrastructure Plans 'Fatal' To Competition 100

twoheadedboy writes "BT today revealed it is to start selling its Physical Infrastructure Access (PIA) for fiber broadband product to other providers later this month, but the announcement was met with one particularly cold response. Geo Networks, which is helping deliver superfast networks in Wales in partnership with the Welsh Assembly, said it was going to withdraw bidding for Government-provided BDUK funds and in all next-generation access sales. 'Inadequacies of the current PIA product are fatal to infrastructure competition,' he added. 'The Government's stated desire for a competitive market in the provision of new optical fiber infrastructure is at risk of complete failure.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

BT Fiber Infrastructure Plans 'Fatal' To Competition

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 17, 2011 @02:47AM (#38082880)

    BT is willing to charge very little for the fibre to the customer but gouges on the fibre backhaul to the provider network. if the rest of the players had any balls they would walk out too.
    without backhaul fibre is pointless. same thing in canada with Bell charging very little per customer for 3rd party ISPs but charging $22,000 per gigE for backhaul. same set of monopolistic thieves keeping the internet at crappy levels in first world countries.

  • by iserlohn ( 49556 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @04:18AM (#38083156) Homepage

    BT is no longer a crown corporation. One could argue that the service it provided when it was public-owned is much better than it is now that it has privatized. Infrastructure and utilities is probably the most suitable application of a public ownership, and it has always been difficult to ensure competition in a market-based model due to the capital investment and economies of scale once the infrastructure is in place. This is prevalent in both telecommunications and energy sectors catering to the end-user.

    Of course, this also applies to things like rail transport which require extensive infrastructure - take British Rail for example.

  • Competition, yes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HopefulIntern ( 1759406 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @04:52AM (#38083248)
    BT fibre is indeed harmful to the competition. The competition being Virgin fibre. The good news is, there will no longer be a monopoly on fibre. The bad news is, those of us who do not have Virgin fibre, and live in broadband notspots, will not see any BT fibre either. Again, this is for the purposes of competition. BT have actually said they will roll out fibre to my exchange by March next year. However, the fine print says that "rolling out fibre" to the exchange means just that; to the exchange. The fibre itself will only run to select cabinets, in my case, only 50% of them. Guess which ones? The ones that already have streets cabled with Virgin fibre, so they can poach Virgin customers. BT already get my £15 per month for the abysmal 0.7mbps they provide, and have no interest in bringing me a better service since I am already paying them.
  • by Bert64 ( 520050 ) <bert AT slashdot DOT firenzee DOT com> on Thursday November 17, 2011 @06:47AM (#38083698) Homepage

    The government should re-nationalise the infrastructure, and then run it on a break even basis...

    Physical infrastructure is a natural monopoly because if the massive up front investment required to actually build it, and the massive inefficiencies of building multiple sets, so it makes sense for this to be government controlled.

  • by Bert64 ( 520050 ) <bert AT slashdot DOT firenzee DOT com> on Thursday November 17, 2011 @07:04AM (#38083742) Homepage

    Yes this is something that so often gets overlooked, connection speeds get faster and faster but the data caps are getting lower... All this means is that you can hit the cap and get disconnected more quickly.

    When they offered 512k connections with no data cap, that worked out to around 150GB/month downloaded (not counting upload) if you ran it flat out... They also offered 2mb connections which could pull 600GB.
    Now they offer a 40mb connection with a 200GB limit, which in actual fact makes it more like "640k connection, burstable to 40mb for limited periods".

    What we really need, in combination with fibre, is small community ISPs... That way you can get high speed uncontended connections with those living near you, which is great for gaming and torrent like protocols... Then other common data can be cached locally too.

    And yes, the price of backhaul is ridiculous, and that just includes the line from the exchange to the isp, so even downloading from servers hosted by the ISP is costly... That's why most ISPs don't bother with caching anymore, internet transit is cheap, bt backhaul is not.

  • by GameboyRMH ( 1153867 ) <gameboyrmh&gmail,com> on Thursday November 17, 2011 @09:56AM (#38084812) Journal

    Hey leave your logic out of this! If the government ran the Internet's infrastructure, there would be no upgra...oh wait...well it would be bloody expensi...aw damn...well you bet they'd spy on...shit.

    The point is...shut up commie!

  • by fireylord ( 1074571 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @09:57AM (#38084820)

    Sigh, you mean laws that mean people can't end up being at the receiving end of an autonomous unchallengable unfair firing? This is something that people in the UK right now are rather glad of since it gives them just a little bit more job security than they would have if employers were able to treat their 'human resource' like so much chattel?

    The political axegrinders are out in force today.

All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin

Working...