The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Hi Casapinos, yes I understand that Equinox 2 is about pricing to wholesale customers. Those wholesale customers are , I think, all resellers-to end users. The input price to them from BT will surely be a major determinant of their end user pricing. Any of the altnets could offer geography based deals to the wholesalers but as you say none could offer the breadth that BT does. I’d say that the strategy must have had an eye on both retaining the wholesalers and enabling them to compete hard for end user customers against the altnets. I’d say that OFCOM has to accept that forbidding BT to price to win is in itself anti competitive and damaging to customers. If they wish to dictate their view of “fair” pricing then we end up with caps like utilities for all end users which would mean windfall profits for some providers and disaster for others. They just need to stop even think of trying to tinker and let the market work. it’ll be interesting to see how the appeals go but I agree with whoever it was that said it wouldn’t be a good move to legislate for higher prices in the current climate.
Predatory is debatable. Yes they are the largest player but I’m renewing my contract at present and every other supplier from people like Sky and Talk Talk to newbies like ZZoom and Truli are quoting cheaper contracts than BT.
Perhaps providing competition and protecting long term provision of what government ministers have described as a national asset to be protected is a fairer description given the environment BT has to operate in.
OFCOM and government surely cannot threaten interference if ownership of BT is in question when it is underperforming in the market and in the next breath shackle it with more interference when it takes measures to protect it’s revenues.
I agree with others,Customer service is good.My contract is ending and I’ve called a few times and got through quickly each time. The move to bring most telephone contact back to UK from India also improved the service/fault response. What I don’t understand is the unwillingness to discount renewals. I’ve been a customer for decades and I’m going to move as the new customer price is significantly below what I’m being offered. The most likely choice will be Plusnet which of course is still BT but two thirds the price!
Share price hit because of strike.
Share price hit because strike resolved.
Hate to see a major increase in profits as the share price would half over night.
Agree, Beats me why the admins don’t bar them they’ve been reported often enough.I’ve barred all of them but this board isn’t what it was.
Pathetic that they think their ravings on an investment board will make any difference at all to their dispute.
Sad people.
I’ve worked for a couple of companies that wasted cash on buybacks that made no difference to share price. Is there any hard evidence that they work?
If they have spare cash it would be better spent paying down debt.
To be of concern or not to be of concern?
Today’s Sunday Times business section has articles predicting that OFCOM are planning supplier of last resort arrangements to take on customers of failed altnets.
The scheme will be modelled on the one used in the energy sector.
No surprise that the likely Supplier is BT.
Having undermined BT for years OFCOM by allowing over 100 altnets to chase the same market the building of duplicate networks in the same areas looks to be leaving many altnets in danger of failure. The article forecasts as many as two thirds of altnets looking in exit the market in the next couple of years.
What will this mean for BT?
Thanks,that does answer the question perfectly clearly.
Thanks for that, I did train as an accountant many years ago but obviously the wrong sort!
I guess it's an actuary we need but your stab at it seems sensible except as you say there are some unknowns in terms of impact. It's certainly a black art. I see the drop has made the front page of the FT today so it is seen as a significant hit but as the stock price hasn't moved much it seems that those who do understand these things don't appear to be worried too much. Having said all that I do wonder if questions need to be asked of the Trustees as having an investment policy that allows a twenty five % loss of asset values due to a single shock makes me think that they're not as cautious as they should be. If the scheme had benefitted from the various things you describe and investment policy was such that the loss had been halved the scheme would have been in a significant surplus I would assume.
Could anyone please explain how the asset base goes down 11billion due to gilts crashing but the funding improves.
Thanks
I know nothing about fashion but would assume that to a large extent much of the loss of volume amongst younger generations may be compensated by slightly older consumers trading down and using ASOS when in better off times they’d have gone elsewhere.
Am I missing something?
Saw this on another share I follow….some familiar things in it i thought.
https://www.griproom.com/fun/10-signs-your-company-is-about-to-be-acquired
To be honest I don’t think the size of any bid is that important, this share has been stuck since the Italian Accounting mess. Market perception of BT is fickle.One moment BT is a critical element of the nation’s future building the infrastructure that will help make UK successful and must be protected at all costs. The next moment it’s a slow moving debt laden shambles off a company led by people who know nothing .A week later it’s a rapacious corporate villain abusing employees and ripping off customers to fatten up overpaid execs and undeserving shareholders.
A serious bid of any level may be just what is needed to crystallise a clearer view of what BT is really worth and why.
Interest in bids surely More likely as dollar reaches parity. Will also help DT and Drahi if they are interested in growing their stake.
Would assume bids from USA would pass security tests easier than some others.
Oops ….delete last line of that post!
Thanks to those that recommended my earlier post asking those on this site who think it’s a vehicle to boost the CWU case against the management and shareholders of BT to desist and use it instead for its original purpose of discussing BT as an investment.
From the gormless response I got from BEETEE I was obviously wasting my time .
I’ve now filtered BEETEE,heavy,smasher,bottom_feeder and oracleofoldham and I suggest all regular users do the same.
Denying these nutters the oxygen of publicity is the only way to stop them taking this site over to push their pro strike agenda.
It’s apparent from the response I got from BEETEE that
What’s happening to this board?
Its purpose is to exchange views and information on BT as an investment not to moralise and spout about morals,values, ethics and whether or not investors and management have good ones or indeed any at all.
Like it or not shareholders do have a voice , admittedly institutional investors have the real say but at the end of the day if the norm becomes that shareholders views don’t matter then goodbye British business.
A large part of so called institutional money is actually ordinary peoples money through pensions, insurance investments and group savings plans in ISA s and much more. If anyone thinks those in control of those funds e..g pension trustees investment managers would let their money stay in companies and investment groups that accepted some of the views on this board that shareholders are bottom of the pecking order they are deluded.
Employees implement the work deemed necessary to achieve the company’s objectives which in turn are set out to support the strategic direction agreed by the Board which in turn is responsible to shareholders.
It’s clearly common sense to look after employees and reward adequately commensurate with how the company is progressing but they have no rights or precedence over shareholders.
If these basic truths were to change by some government edict no company will ever be able to raise new capital in the UK,existing share values will decline to such a level that the world’s asset strippers will acquire and destroy British companies and with them the jobs.
We can exchange insults and views on the fairness or otherwise of how things work until the cows come home but this little board isn’t going to change a thing.
Can we please get back to Posts on BT as an investment and only things related to that.
No one is going to convert people who think differently so the workers versus shareholders posts are just a waste of time.
I wouldn’t read too much into supposed analyst assumptions. I say that because the article says they update their DCF projections every day. If they’re doing that I suspect a set of algorithms prepares 98 % plus of the “analysis “ unless they have legions of analysts which seems unlikely to me.
Just repeating the words on the RNS. Where there were sales on the other people the words “principally for tax purposes” followed the info on the sale. For those two there were no such qualifying words to explain the sale.