Member Info for snoopz

@Aus3009

If I remember correctly, you're a big fan of AI — so try asking it this question:

'Is Starlink an Altnet?' Just make sure to use the correct industry terminology — 'Altnet' (as I’ve consistently used in my posts), not 'Alternative Network' as you've been using.

@Aus3009

You ask "Can you work out how many different kinds of churn there might be from Openreach’s perspective?" Easy answer — none. Openreach is a wholesale infrastructure provider, not a retail service provider. They don’t have contracts with consumers; instead, they supply network access (e.g., fibre, copper) to ISPs like BT, Sky, TalkTalk, Vodafone, and others. So there’s no concept of “losing customers” in the traditional retail sense. An end user might switch from BT to Sky, for example, but still remain on the Openreach network.

BT, on the other hand, does publish its monthly churn figures because churn is a key performance metric for both investors and analysts. It’s also subject to regulatory scrutiny from Ofcom. As of yesterday’s results, BT’s monthly churn rates were 1.2% for broadband and 1.0% for mobile post-paid (feel free to look it up - they're in the document you did not bother to read). These figures are in line with industry benchmarks and significantly better than those of many smaller or regional providers, where limited support and weaker contract terms often drive churn above 1.5–2% per month.

BT’s churn is also much lower now than it was 10–20 years ago, due to improved customer retention, tighter contracts, and better bundling strategies.

The problem here is that you're overcomplicating a straightforward concept. In telecoms, churn is simply the proportion of customers who leave a service within a given period — it doesn't matter where they go. For all BT knows, a churned customer could’ve switched providers or been hit by a train — the metric just records that they’re no longer a customer

Your almost there - Starlink is NOT an Altnet as understood by anybody involved with telecoms in the UK.

& In telecoms, churn refers to the rate at which customers stop using a service or switch to another provider over a given period.

So.....Churn Rate = (Number of customers lost during a period) ÷ (Total number of customers at the start of the period) - Usually expressed as a percentage per month, quarter, or year.

See, that was not toooo complicated, was it?

@Aus3009

I'm amazed that after your millions of posts you don not know what a UK Atnet is. Starlink is NOT an Altnet because it does not build or operate terrestrial broadband infrastructure, is not part of the UK’s fibre market, and operates in a completely different technological and regulatory space. It is a satellite ISP, not a UK-based alternative network operator.

Do you want me to explain what "churn" is now that I'm about it?

@Aus3009

As usual, none of your posts make any sense!

- Starlink is NOT an altnet.

- They won’t “take enough revenue to impact BT’s operations, debt servicing, dividends, or future upgrades.” The only customers signing up for satellite broadband are those unreachable by conventional FTTP or mobile networks. In fact, BT likely views Starlink as an opportunity rather than a threat—they’re already exploring partnerships to boost connectivity in rural and hard-to-reach UK areas.

- And who’s this mysterious “genius” behind Starlink if not Elon Musk? Maybe Sunil Mittal, secretly plotting a takeover bid? Whoever it is, they’re unlikely to magically pull thousands of satellites out of the sky or solve Starlink’s capacity challenges overnight.

Do you ever do any research before writing all this nonsense?

Elon Musk has pulled off something remarkable with Starlink — getting a large-scale LEO satellite broadband network off the ground in record time. Many others have tried and failed over the decades. With around 7,600 satellites already active and plans to expand beyond 34,000, the scale is extremely impressive.

But is it a real threat to BT? Starlink certainly provides an alternative to traditional landline and mobile networks — especially in rural, underserved, or politically sensitive regions. However, it's hard to see it posing a serious challenge in the UK. The service is significantly more expensive, can be affected by adverse weather conditions, and is really only transformative in places where connectivity is otherwise poor or non-existent — areas like parts of the Scottish Highlands, perhaps. But such regions are few and far between here.

For most people in the UK, the high cost would be a major barrier — unless the government decided to subsidise it, which is possible.

As Fleccy has pointed out, there are also serious technical limitations as well. Starlink satellites have finite capacity, with restrictions on how many users can be supported simultaneously on each beam. Even if prices dropped, it’s unlikely Starlink could scale to compete meaningfully with fixed-line or mobile networks in densely populated areas.

One of the biggest structural drawbacks of satellite systems is their lack of upgradability. Once a satellite is in orbit, its hardware — bandwidth, processing power, and transmission capability — is fixed for the rest of its operational life. Fibre networks and mobile infrastructure, by contrast, can evolve continuously.

So, in summary, I don’t see Starlink as much of a threat to BT. Nor do I think the Altnets, Virgin Media, or even the Vodafone/Three merger pose a major risk. as BT has the scale and resources to adapt and respond. To my mind, the real risks lie elsewhere: a cash-strapped UK government and Ofcom, which at times seems more like a meddling socialist quango than a serious telecoms regulator!

I’m no expert, though, so I’d genuinely welcome other opinions on all this.

Because the people calling Openreach "the network" are trolls who bought their shares (if they actually have any) at the top of the market and have been suffering from buyers remorse ever since! They know very well there won't be any bid, or takeover, or sell-off of openreach - they just keep posting that nonsense to wind people up!

Yep, Philip Jansen did a marvellous job. He took over from a clown and put the current strategy in place. Allison Kirkby is getting all the credit - and is probably doing a good job - but it's Jansen that really made the difference!

Interesting article in The Telegraph:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/07/24/bt-broadband-exodus-slows-as-alt-net-rivals-struggle/

The gist of the story is that the rate of broadband losses is declining as Openreach roll out their FTTP while the Altnets are running out of money.

Given that another 6 million homes will have access to BT's FTTP by the end of next year and many of the Altnets will go bankrupt, it's pretty inevitable that we are fast approaching a time when the decline is reversed and the BT numbers start increasing again!

You should know by now that the dividend is actually payed on September 10th.

@PRK1

Yep, your quite right, BT is a basket case and their strategy makes no sense whatsoever. Their stupidity is reflected in the share price which has been dropping like a stone for quite some time now. Good job you spotted the problem a couple of years back when you sold most of your BT shares and switched to Vodafone!

@Aus3009

"With over 650,000 connections lost to other operators in 3 months!"

Just a number you plucked out of the air! Total nonsense like most of your posts.

@MJS1

Our resident trolls would never let FACTS interfere with a good lie!

BT was forced to spend a fortune removing Huawei equipment from its switches and base stations — all in the name of national security. And yet now, we're supposed to believe the government would just stand by and let any foreign entity take over and do whatever it likes? That’s cloud-cuckoo-land thinking from the resident troll!

I didn’t think the results looked particularly strong, yet the shares are soaring. I suppose we’ll need to wait a day or two for the full reaction, once the analysts have gone over the numbers with their slide rules — but the initial response is certainly a departure from the usual one on results day!

@fleccy

Arma is just this board's resident troll back again with the same old nonsense. Cutting and pasting post after post just to wind people up - sad loser!

@Arma

There is an enormous flaw in your masterplan. You don't seem to understand what a takeover is. The clue is in the name - somebody else takes over the company. Sooo, the share price won't "climb astronomically"....because there won't be any shares!

@fleccy

Maybe me and you could make a bid? British ownership (in my case anyway), no competition conflicts, and you could have a word with Lloyds to finance the whole thing. OK, maybe a bit unlikely...but it's more realistic than any other proposal I've seen on here!

Sooo, it always comes back to the magic bid on here. I suppose we should be glad that there are fewer trolls fabricating stories to support the idea, but it still amazes me that otherwise rational people seriously believe a takeover is likely. Do they not do any research?

Numerous UK governments — across parties — have indicated they consider BT to be critical national infrastructure and effectively a national treasure. Under the National Security and Investment Act 2021, the government has the authority to review and block acquisitions involving strategic assets like BT — and they’ve already exercised that power. When Patrick Drahi’s Altice built an 18% stake, the Business Secretary at the time made it clear: “We will not hesitate to act if needed to safeguard UK telecom infrastructure.” Drahi himself reassured the government that he had no intention of launching a takeover.

Fast-forward to today, and we now have a Labour government, backed by unions that have repeatedly expressed strong opposition to any such deal.

Meanwhile, Sunil Mittal — now BT’s largest shareholder — has stated clearly that he has “no intention of making a formal bid to acquire the company” and isn’t seeking a board seat. He’s described BT as a “good, long-term investment” and an “attractive buy,” not a target.

So, to believe a takeover is coming, you’d have to believe that:

- The UK government would allow disruption to one of the few national utilities currently functioning relatively well.

- The unions would quietly roll over and accept it.

- Sunil Mittal is lying through his teeth and secretly preparing a bid.

And let’s not forget — many of the same people hyping a potential bid are also loudly complaining about BT’s finances:

- Declining customer base

- Falling EBITDA

- Low margins

- Intense competition

- Massive debt

- Huge pension liabilities

Yet somehow they expect that a buyer — presumably one that has not read their brilliant posts — will come in and pay a 40% premium to acquire what they themselves describe as a basket case? Come on, get real!!!

Sad that I'm responding to this board's resident troll, but you did ask a question so I suppose it deserves an answer. NO I'm not a BT engineer, nor have I ever worked for them, nor have ever been in a union.