London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
“Digs” not “digs” & “payback”
Bertram I don’t think that’s fair. I mainly see spiteful attacks on Mandy, whereas I see humour in majority of his posts.
Mandy is making a good point in so many ways, when he has repeated his conviction as many times as Fleccy has repeated his on this board, then I may change my mind.
Low share price, little interest from the business community, competition really trying to get their act together, reducing revenue (apart from pay rises)
Whose posts reflect current reality ? I think Mandy’s do, when you take out some of his flair for a tale or two.
Do you see BT striving to increase revenue other than full fibre? Which Mandy correctly points out is fraught with unknowns.
There is completion, foreign money, technology changes (over a 30 - 50 year oau back). Only yesterday I was talking about dogs needed to get it fitted, this alone makes me wonder if I can with alternative options?
Full fibre is a plan, I can see the potential cost savings, but the long payback period & the potential market changes during that time period, do present risks.
It’s nowhere near the milk and honey in the future, safe bet some would have you believe
& share price reflects this……. Which Mandy eloquently points out. (In between the poetry)
See what I mean, not worth reading.
"BT and Global, the Media & Entertainment Group, have today announced a 10-year partnership to upgrade the nation’s legacy payphones and roll out more digital hubs for local communities – in a move that will provide better connectivity and hyper-local advertising in more than 200 towns and cities across the UK. Global will also continue to represent BT’s street furniture advertising sales for the next decade."
https://global.com/global-news/bt-and-global-announce-10-year-digital-out-of-home-partnership/
"So glad Mandy and me make no sense to Fleccy"
Well done Aus for giving mandy the oxygen he needs to continue to ruin this Bb, drive away posters who actually contribute, attack any posters who do not agree with his opinions/ tunnel vision/ bid rhetoric. The BB is not worth reading ATM, Well done.
I came for share chat but recieved 1980s cheryl Baker videos , while she is of course a national treasure what's going on guys ☺️
expat - i don’t think that’s right. the energy price guarantee was the response to higher fuel prices resulting from war in ukraine. the energy price cap was around before this happened as a regulated price. the argument about it being too little / too much is a separate discussion. it is however an example of regulated price and not free market, *** abandon capitalism
Abject very well said to the point that if they do not get the message, other issues are probably at play. all the best
Not sure the Price Cap is quite the same as it was introduced as an emergency response to the war impact on utility supplies rather than an attempt to manage business as usual pricing. Even the apparent downward pressure it applied allowed British Gas profits to increase tenfold from 22 to 23 more than compensating for the costs they incurred during Covid.
Aus I never suggested I have experience in the subject, nor did I mention anything about blown Fibre. I gave a common sense answer and discussed some details of a conversation I had with a contractor. Obviously if Openreach can't access the property, via existing ducting or overhead, then it'd be a bespoke solution based on a survey and a conversation between the surveyor and the home owner; How much that'd cost, or whether the homeowner would be asked to contribute, is unknown and probably depends on the work required.
Fleccy, "If OFCOM hadn't ordered BT to reduce prices then there wouldn't even be a case, since the case against BT is based purely on the fact that BT voluntarily reduced prices on OFCOM's instruction."
All BT need to do in Court, therefore, is to prove what you say fleccy and OFCOM will have to pay the penalties, if any, because BT weren't responsible ? Am I missing something ?
Well done Fleccy - hopefully someone who knows about things will be able to tell
Me.
I’ve already asked engineers in the street, they said they don’t blow fibre anymore & it’s digs or poles now (might be wrong, that’s why I’m asking)
So thanks very much, I’ll just chalk this down to Something else you don’t really understand but push yourself forward for. You have 11645 other posts just like it.
"So a fibre connection to my home, I think requires a dig, through my driveway, garden and possibly part of my street."
Many connections will be overhead, or already ducted, so should be easy. I doubt Openreach would excavate someone's driveway unless the customer agreed it was at their own risk. They'd probably try and find a route that doesn't involve excavation in tarmac or concrete, maybe along a sidewall leading to and adjoining the house wall.
I live on a gated development and BT ducts were installed when the houses were built; A contractor for Openreach recently did a survey and I was surprised to learn that the copper cable outside the development isn't ducted, but dug in along a verge; The contractor advised that they're looking at installing more Telegraph poles along the road, outside the development, to supply FTTP. CityFibre have already microtrenched a good portion of the road, with small access boxes outside each property, but they'll have to access the properties by excavating whereas Openreach will likely go overhead from the new poles.
Aus I believe the total figure Patourel's lawyers are chasing is £1.3 Billion; It isn't an insignificant sum, but it wont bankrupt BT if the full award is granted.
A substantial/biggest portion of the full award is relying on the court awarding compensation to split purchase customers up to the trial start date in 2024, which would go against OFCOM's decision to class such customers as well engaged and able to search out competitive deals online.
BT is one of the most regulated companies on the planet, OFCOM limit their wholesale pricing offered to competitors and basically tell BT/Openreach how high to jump; There's a good argument that court's shouldn't be involved in deciding pricing for such a highly regulated entity, in view of the regulatory thumb BT are under. Something else, to suggest that Landlines are a market in their own right is flawed, since other options are available like Mobiles and services from other CP's, who BT have no control over, you could argue that classing Landlines as its own market is opinion and not fact. The reason other CP's followed BT's landline rental increases is because they don't actually want landline customers, and therefore raised prices to discourage that class of customer transferring service to them from BT. If the CAT do award Split Purchase customers compensation, then they've basically overruled OFCOM's classification of that type of customer and decided BT's pricing going forward for that type of service.
I'd be surprised if the CAT include Split Purchase customers for compensation, should BT lose, since they'd be saying they have more expertise than OFCOM in deciding regulatory matters in relation to BT's pricing; So my guess would be around £600 Million maximum, if BT loses.
In my opinion BT should win this case, since they've only been dancing to OFCOM's tune and doing as they're told. If OFCOM hadn't ordered BT to reduce prices then there wouldn't even be a case, since the case against BT is based purely on the fact that BT voluntarily reduced prices on OFCOM's instruction.
A question (not for Fleccy I really don’t care )
( although I know he will jump all over this)
(He won’t be able to resist an opportunity to over compensate)
So a fibre connection to my home, I think requires a dig, through my driveway, garden and possibly part of my street.
This work needs doing and then made good? For every home?. Surely these are the real costs for the fibre rollout, up front costs for millions of homes seems huge ? 24 million homes @ £1000 is a further £25bln?
Can this be right?
Hey Mandy, I don’t necessarily share your concerns about CWU members etc, but everything else seems to make sense to me.
A layperson view of this class action seemed to me to be a non starter? I don’t think there was a case to answer. Proceeding through the courts like this proves otherwise, it would have all Been halted, long before, it that was the case. My gut feel is, having gone to court, almost anything could happen, so it’s the definition of “uncertainty” which of course is good news for the boys who think a low price is good news, even if that price represents a risk to their capital investment. BT is a huge company with huge costs, miss steps by BT can reap all kinds of painful consequences very quickly, because a company of this size can’t change quick enough. Size has its advantages, but in a changing, reducing market &!stiff competition can take its toll. I’m
Not saying I think we are there, but I am saying reducing revenue is a problem which needs solving.
I hope a £250m fine isn’t on its way, it’s better than. £1.6bln, will still hurt & I think it might encourage further action down the road?
Fibre build remains positive, it’s obvious other providers will try to undermine this investment by offering a wholesale option, this worries me more than anything in regards to my significant BT investment, which has come about by me chasing a falling share price funnily enough ?
So glad Mandy and me make no sense to Fleccy. That’s rich coming from a poster who doesn’t assess risk, thinks £1.6bln fine is unimportant & who doesn’t have the capacity to understand his own acronyms posts more times than is healthy just repeating the same old. (Mandy covers that very well)
He’s like the guy in a meeting trying to convince everyone he knows……..
Expat have you ever heard of the energy price cap on gas and electricity ? There are other examples
Seeing this prompted me to wonder if ,as an independent company, there are any constraints on how much profit BT can make in any area of its business. I can only assume there must be otherwise the Class Action wouldn't possibly have a case and the lawyers clearly think they have a chance of winning.. On the other hand if there is a limit then surely OFCOM would be policing the pricing.
I can't think of any other business where Government or their agencies decide how independent companies price their products, don't think gas and electric are decided by government as Centrica made huge profits last year when people were struggling with their bills.
Can anyone explain how this works ? I'd assume that if BT were to consistently overprice then ultimately they'd slowly go bust but I'm obviously missing something.
Time BT withdrew BT Home Essentials For all the thanks they get.
Aus you never make sense, so it makes sense you'd encourage Mandy. Was you returning back from one of your VMO2 fanboy get-together's? I only ask because you said you were on a train.
“Make sure I didn’t live near him first” ( only excuse is I’m on a train :))
Goof grief Mandy, it comes to something where you’re making more sense than anyone on here.l!!! You can be as grumpy and real as you like, far as I’m concerned. Your truth is more real than these diminishing share price fanboys. Some of which think a £1.6bln fine is no problem (tells you everything you need to know)
As for some of the life stories and 101 self congratulating, adobe merchants on here, I’d say “it’s none of our business” & what’s the point of making silly claims about personal wealth (or not) on a board where it’s easier to lie than tell truth?
As for the blockers…. I think people who block you have serious character flaws if they cant handle public comments on a public board. I mean, I have a lowest of the low stalker called NDN who think he can intimidate me by misusing my personal details & not respecting my privacy (god knows what other filth he’s into, you might like to take a guess). Still you would have thought he’d make sure I didn’t lice best him first !!!!
Stay true Mandy !!! Share price is low, share is under performing, as is the company, so a good main is far more appropriate than blind faith !!
Winning the race
Finishing last having done your best
Finishing last having never tried
I know where Mandy is