Member Info for fleccy

To underline my point, in the previous post.

From 2008:

"Virgin Media launches UK's fastest-ever broadband"

"Virgin Media will today launch the UK's fastest ever broadband service — at 50Mb per second, twice the speed possible on a conventional phone line — as pressure builds on regulator Ofcom to open up Virgin's network to competition as part of its plans for the future of internet access."

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/dec/14/internet-virginmedia

So VM were offering the fastest speeds more than 12 years ago, and still only manage to generate revenue less than £6 Billion now. I've got nothing against VM, but the narrative being pushed that they're some kind of a threat to BT is wrong imo.

That Guardian article has a feel of today's headlines, just change the speeds and some of the tech references.

"As I said home many homes can BT deliver BB speeds no one needs, when compared to its competition ? &. Does that mean BT on this occasion is playing catch-up?"

According to media releases VM currently have more Gigabit coverage than Openreach, but it makes no difference. VM's problem is, their coverage is patchy within their Franchise areas, for example I live within their franchise area, and my road isn't covered. Another problem for VM is that Openreach are forced to offer wholesale products, at regulated prices, forcing VM to compete directly on price against players like Sky, Talk Talk, etc, cutting VM's margins. Since most people are happy with their current FTTC service, there's no incentive to move onto VM. You could argue that OFCOM has damaged VM by regulating BT. Since Openreach have had to offer Physical Infrastructure Access for years now, VM will struggle to compete on that front too. BT are building FTTP capability "like Fury", with the new network easier to maintain, and cheaper to run, who's really playing catch up? Honestly, I don't see any threat to BT from VM.

"It’s okay lil Rod, you can trust me when I say these are not retired engineers."

Interesting statement Aus. I can't wait to read your theory about my background. Please enlighten everyone, and me, what am I?

"The only power requirement at the customer end will be for the router, not to convert a Fibre path to a coax path then a router.
Now honestly, which will end up being the more reliable, greener, and end user friendly"

I agree NDNIC, VM's network does appear to be a complicated mix of Equipment's, highlighting a evolutionary process rather than a complete redesign. From what I've read BT are going for a completely new network, with the legacy network scrapped. BT's local access network will mainly consist of three elements, the OLT at the Head End, Fibre and splitters, and the ONT's at the customer premises. Once the customer data arrives at the OLT, it will be aggregated with data from other OLT's and then carried to the cloud routers, via DWDM, using equipment like the Ciena 6500 featured in the VM Head End video. The Backbone Switch/Routers might be Juniper, like the one in the VM video, or big Cisco Network Switch/Routers. BT will likely have specialist servers and routers dealing with some of the more complex specialised functions, but it'll all be embedded in the cloud. From an Engineering and maintenance perspective, BT's network should be easy to maintain at the local level, with all the complex functions built into the cloud. Maybe VM intend to use the £10 Billion, they are looking to borrow, to replace their current legacy network, but I haven't read anything to suggest that.
All the DDF's will go, and all the connectivity will be over Fibre's feeding into High Density ODF's.
Big business customers requiring much higher levels of secure access, like banks, have dedicated Fibre connections, with secure VPN pipes across the cloud, which aren't cheap. Big business customers will always require more specialised managed services, so things wont change much there.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2021/04/video-virgin-media-broadband-engineer-shows-how-it-all-works.html

Hi Quinny29, I actually agree with Aus that "You may as well ask the pope". I strongly believe that BT has good future prospects, and has big upside potential, but I don't have a crystal ball. In my case I don't have any time limit on my investment, and I've purchased a further £35,000 worth of BT shares at 106p and 112p during the pandemic. I'm happy to hold for 10 years if necessary, and hopefully collect dividends in the meantime, but if and when I sell will depend on market sentiment sharing my view of BT's potential.
No one on here can advise you on how to invest your hard earned cash. You can read other peoples opinions, but research what you read and make your own decisions.

"I think you will continue to see a landline on the desk of most offices for some time to come"

Most big businesses use Voip now through systems like cisco call manager, there may be some PABX's still out there, but neither will utilise PSTN after 2025. Once the PSTN switch off occurs, everyone will be forced onto VOIP, and the traditional landline will disappear. I currently have a landline socket without a phone plugged into it, we just use mobiles now on sim only contracts. Signalling protocols like Dass and Q931 will disappear, as well as the conventional home landlines.

Haha, there's been loads of transactions in own shares, I should pay more attention. I've not been watching VOD so much lately.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/VOD/share-buyback-programme-a6yke46pbmn0q2x.html

The RNS relates to 6,585,202, not 40,000,000, but more RNS's may follow if there's a connection.

Hmmmm may be related to this.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/VOD/transaction-in-own-shares-eyx42p9bhn36t3f.html

"Would not a merger with Bt be a good idea? It would make a very strong Uk and global brand and would make a good symmetry."

As comsman points out, such an event wouldn't pass the first hurdle for regulatory approval. BT own EE, which is one of the big three mobile providers in the UK, Vodafone being another. Vodafone also took over Cable & Wireless Worldwide in 2012/13, which would be another nail in the regulatory coffin for any merger. It just wouldn't happen under any circumstance.

22-Apr-21 16:47:34 133.20 40,000,000 Sell* 134.04 134.08 53m

40 Million shares traded off book. Not sure if this was from earlier in the day, and only reported after the close, or traded after the close. Anyone any ideas?

"this online bullying against Fleccy must cease!"

Thanks for speaking up on my behalf Velo, but I didn't register it as bullying, I assumed it was mild Velvet rage from lifetime members of the Blue Oyster Bar.

This should calm them down

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBTTWDHvmX0

"And I surmise that you, my dear Fleccy, are a pompous and boring old fahrt ??"

Haha, is that the best come back you can come up with?

"So true Faulty. So very true."

Rod after reading your posts, I have no idea what your level of knowledge is, but I surmise that Dancing Queen, I will survive, and Over the Rainbow are amongst your favourite songs.

"This is all fantastic and that, no relevance what so ever to the SP in any way shape or form, fantastic drivel, from a pie in the sky Openreach engineer that has far to much time on his hands, probably long term sick claiming PTSD after he invested in a cheap suit but still could not become a Manager."

FM, you should go back through my posts and check what I've written, you seem to be confused. On occasion I have shared my employment history and working for Openreach wasn't part of it.
Talking about GPON is hardly technical, even you could probably read up on it and gain an understanding without any technical background. Most school kids studying physics, and looking at rainbows, can understand concepts like different wavelengths of light combined and separated.
Anyone who thinks my posts are technical obviously chose woodwork and drama at school, and slept through their science classes. Faultsman, I bet you were an ace Drama Student.

"Does anyone else on here find it extremely tiresome and somewhat frustrating to come on to a forum about BT Share Price performance and related news "

The press makes a big deal about the VM/O2 merger and the narrative is that they are somehow better than BT, which is a view I disagree with. There's massive changes happening in Telecommunications, in the next ten years, and some understanding of the changes is important in weighing up the investment case for BT.
Aus uses VM as tool to bash BT, I'm just trying to give an alternative view in defence of BT. I'm heavily invested in BT, so do have a vested interest, but I only post what I believe to be true and try and back up my posts with relevant links. It's not like any of this is off topic, and I only kick back when people attack me.

"I don't blame VM for sweating their assets, as the right off for a full network redesign would wipe them out"

I meant write off lol, DOH.

"The next part of the sentence explains docsis doesn’t need electrical component. .... it’s not difficult, especially when I next detail why the other stuff is not an advantage. "

Whereas BT are moving to more efficient brand new PON Local Access Networks with a Cloud backbone network, VM appear to be sweating their current assets to the limit. I don't blame VM for sweating their assets, as the right off for a full network redesign would wipe them out. What's clear is that BT's new network will be cheaper to run and maintain, and therefore offer better margins. As much as CATV networks were higher capacity at the turn of the century, the same wont be true with the FTTP network rollouts.

"Meanwhile the competing network can offer 1gig+ to 17 million premises today"

By your reasoning then, why aren't customers flocking to them, and why is VM's revenue so much lower than BT's?

VM's revenue for 2020 was just over £5 Billion, O2's revenue is just over £6.2 Billion, so the combined entity generates less than £12 Billion.
NTL/VM have been around for a long long time, why didn't they wipe the floor with BT years ago if they're so good?