Member Info for snoopz

@Terraplane

Monopolies are not a good idea for anyone - even the guys with the monopoly, as without competition there is no incentive to improve. However, the overbuilding that Ofcom have allowed (even encouraged) is a disgrace. The problems that those Altnets are now facing was totally predictable and it's a pity that nobody is ever held accountable anymore.

@fleccy

As you well know Ofcom is an unelected quango that has done more damage to the UK telecoms industry than almost anybody else (various UK Governments and most BT CEOs would be the other contenders). As the regulator for telecoms in the UK, they are responsible for the mess they have allowed to develop with the Altnets — where in high population density areas there may be 7 or 8 competing with each other and also with the established players like Openreach and VM. Even a baby could tell that it will "all end in tears". So Ofcom had to reprimand Jansen for pointing out this obvious truth as it reflected badly on themselves. They can let the Altnets say whatever they want as it's mainly bleating about unfair competitions which will inevitably end in bankruptcy (or "consolidation" as Ofcom might prefer it to be called)!

If you hate engineers so much, why did you buy shares in a technology company which is based on engineering systems?

@AUS3009

Allison Kirkby did say that Openreach is undervalued, meaning it's (theoretical) market value isn’t reflected in BT’s valuation. She also said she would have to look at options for the network arm if its value doesn’t become reflected in the share price. She even went so far as to suggest spinning off Openreach after the rollout is completed, while at the same time expressing a clear preference for keeping Openreach within BT. That's precisely why as CEO’ she is "paid the big bucks". To bring such a discrepancy to the market's attention and to try and talk up the value of her company - which incidentally seems to have worked fine since she's been in charge. She knows very well that anything she can actually do is restricted by agreements which BT entered into in 2017, but that does not matter as she did not have to address such complications. She probably won't even be there when the fibre roll-out is completed. Trying to guess what will happen with BT a few years down the line is a complete waste of time as the landscape will have changed dramatically by then!

@Aus3009

Actually Terraplane comes across as the kind of guy who worked for BT and/or Openreach at some stage, so has a good insight into the company setup. He has pointed out to you and many others on several occasions that Openreach is a division of the BT Group that manages and maintains the physical telecom infrastructure — like the local access network (the cables, ducts, and exchanges) that connect homes and businesses to the wider telecom network. However, the BT Group owns Openreach itself. So, while Openreach operates and maintains the network infrastructure on a largely “independent” basis (to provide equal access to all service providers), the ownership of the actual network assets remains with BT Group. I think you finally got your head around this, so should thanks the guy for politely pointing it out to you.

However Terraplane has never explained why your Openreach scheme is a non-starter, so I'll explain. You suggest:

- BT selling or dividing Openreach and/or the network across interested parties so they can have a stake, Sky, Vodafone etc etc

- BT leasing their network (for a substantial fee) to Openreach for 50 or even 100 years

The reason this is not feasible is because neither the BT or Openreach boards have the power to do this. When Openreach was hived off as a separate company they agreed to abide by an "Independent Governance Structure" which Ofcom imposed on them. This includes a clause that "Openreach must report to Ofcom and demonstrate equivalence of access to all customers, not just BT’s retail arm". BT cannot simply sell off Openreach at will without navigating significant regulatory, legal, and structural hurdles — and likely facing intense scrutiny from both Ofcom and the UK Government. So a cosy deal between BT and a few of their main rivals would not be approved - there will be the objection of 100+ altnets to take into account for starters.

- there are over 100 altnets to take into consideration for starters!!!!

If you're really interested there is a PDF called "Commitments of BT PLC and Openreach Limited to Ofcom" which can be downloaded from BT’s site which explains in specific detail numerous reasons why your scheme won't work. But reading that would probably be tooooo boring for you!!!

@Terraplane

I've been following this board for years so am aware of the antics of some of the posters. I suppose the main offender gets banned periodically so has to then resurface under a new handle. Pity he ruins a perfectly good discussion board with his incessant nonsense.

However the other guy (Aus3009) comes across as a bit of a confused soul, suffering himself a bit from the Dunning-Kruger effect he quotes - but he does not seem to be particularly malignant. I suppose he bought into BT when the shares were flying hight, and now he's getting a bit desperate and is clinging to any hope that there is some miracle strategy to get his money back. Seems he is not aware that none of the major shareholders or board have the time or inclination to read anything on this board. So all his bright ideas and opinions will pass them by, and they will just carry on and do whatever they were planning to do in the first place. Hopefully, just sitting on their hands and watching the share price rise slowly as the FTTP rollout instigated by Philip Jansen a few years back works it's magic.

So firstly you complain that I don't give any opinion about your beloved BT bid and Openreach sale. Then you say that actually couldn't be bothered to read my original posts. That's because you are only interested in trying to wind people up by recycling the same nonsense time and time again. Most of the regular contributors on here are well aware of that so they just ignore you. They know it's only a matter of time before you disappear and then pop-up again under a new name and start spouting off with some new nonsense!

I already wrote about my thoughts regarding a bid for BT in my first post ("The Magic Bid") whose Subject thread you have been writing under ever since. I then went on to give my opinion on the sale of Openreach and/or the network in my second post. Repeating myself again and again....and again adds no value. If you really want to engage in an exchange of ideas, that requires you to actually read what other contributers write instead of just posting your own very repetitive opinions!

Would it be possible for you two guys to swap contact details and get off this board. Repeating the same speculation again and again...and again will not make any of it actually happen. And it's extremely boring!!!

Reply to Aus3009 Question:

Hiving off Openreach one way or another has been on the cards for decades. That's the reason BT set it up as a separate company in 2017 — as a defensive tactic to stop Ofcom imposing a complete split. So now, as we all know, it has its own management and board of directors, who can act on their own to make investment decisions and work with other telecom providers. Also given that Sunil Mittal, Carlos Slim, and Deutsche Telekom collectively have a huge stake in BT, they will surely have a big influence on any decisions which are made. It should be remembered that all these players are experts in the telecoms sector and it does not really matter that Mittal and Slim are not on the Board of Directors, their opinion will be known and taken into account. Also, Allison Kirkby has worked in telecoms for about 15 years in Scandinavia and is considered to have been very successful in her CEO roles at Tele 2, TDC and telia - not at all the weak DEI obsessed leader depicted on this board by some members. Anyway, I'd expect all these players will be happy to work together, as they share a common interest in helping BT thrive. Sooo, getting back to your question about Openreach, actually the BT BoD cannot just do whatever they want with it. BT cannot simply sell off Openreach or share it out amongst the bigger players (i.e. their main rivals) without navigating significant regulatory, legal, and structural hurdles — and likely facing intense scrutiny from both Ofcom and the UK Government. This was likely BT’s intention all the way back in 2017—a kind of unconventional poison pill. But now, the BT Board, along with Sunil, Carlos, and DT will have to navigate a complex web of approvals and governance to reshape the structure according to their vision. In truth, it may prove simplest to leave things as they are. After all, Philip Jansen’s nationwide FTTP rollout appears to be progressing according to plan. And even if you aren't especially fond of engineers, the old adage still holds true "If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it".

We get subjected to continual nonsense on this board about a bid for BT which is just around the corner, but never actually emerges. Well, let's imagine for a second that it does happen and that it's allowed to go through — how would it pan out. Well, if Sunil Mittal, Carlos Slim, and Deutsche Telekom were to conspire to make the bid happen, then they are almost there already with about 40% of the shares between them. No need to overpay as there is no chance of a rival bid to spoil the party. So, the only real question is the price. A 50% premium would be normal, but I'd say 30-40% is more likely to be the final offer. After all, they can argue the shares are riding high at the current price - and if a bid was to fail then the price would collapse (as is always the case with BT on bad news....any news actually). I've been following such bids for years and think most institutional investors would bale out if they are offered £2.80. Sooo, that’s what all these guys going on about the bid — one Mittal has more or less personally promised them—are going to get (£2.80, and probably less). One of the silliest lines I've read on here recently is "The BT share price will shoot up post-bid, and then climb to stratospheric heights when the network (aka Openreach) is hived off." Does this fool have any understanding at all of what a takeover means? The shares won't "climb to stratospheric heights" because once the bidders get their hands on 75% of the company, they will de-list it — which means there won't be any shares! Personally, I agree with fleccy's reasoning that the company value will increase substantially once the fibre swich is complete, although lots of unforeseen events could derail his optimistic view. Anyway, I'd be very unhappy to be forced to sell my shares for £2.80, so am very glad that nobody will be bidding for BT anytime soon!