Should Virgin Media be forced to open its cable network to competitors?

[Marcus125]

Ok the title is not true but...

Admin edit (Chris): It is now. ;)

With Fujitsu about to lay fibre and open it up to VM and Open reach laying fibre and opening it up(yes VM could and probably will use Open reach's fibre) will Virginmedia be letting others use its fibre network?

Sky have to give VM there channels even though sky have invested millions in building up the tv network. It all seems a little 1 way to me, VM want everything for nothing but don't want to give anyone access to its network.

[craigj2k12]

virgin own its network, so has complete controll over it

BT network is mostly owned by the government, so they have to open it up to everyone

[Digital Fanatic]

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2011/04/57.gif

[Chris]

Thread title changed.

There's no need to be deliberately misleading. If your thread is genuinely interesting people will take part in it. If it's not, a misleading title will just cause annoyance.

[Stuart]

Ok the title is not true but...

With Fujitsu about to lay fibre and open it up to VM and Open reach laying fibre and opening it up(yes VM could and probably will use Open reach's fibre) will Virginmedia be letting others use its fibre network?

Sky have to give VM there channels even though sky have invested millions in building up the tv network. It all seems a little 1 way to me, VM want everything for nothing but don't want to give anyone access to its network.

Actually, it's not quite as one way as you say. For a start, while Sky give access to the TV channels, they have their own LLU network which I doubt they'd give anyone access to. BT are only opening up their own fibre network because (I believe) they are required to.

[Ignitionnet]

virgin own its network, so has complete controll over it

BT network is mostly owned by the government, so they have to open it up to everyone

This isn't true, BT's network is in its entirety owned by BT. The government has no ownership of BT.

[craigj2k12]

This isn't true, BT's network is in its entirety owned by BT. The government has no ownership of BT.

they have investment in it and therefore is regulated by ofcom

[Ignitionnet]

Actually, it's not quite as one way as you say. For a start, while Sky give access to the TV channels, they have their own LLU network which I doubt they'd give anyone access to. BT are only opening up their own fibre network because (I believe) they are required to.

Sky's LLU network is using BT's network. They can't offer access to BT's network. The part of the network they do own, core fibre, is both used by them and other companies.

The issue is now more one of whether or not VM should be required to allow access to their ducts and physical infrastructure. They aren't going to have much choice in the not too distant future.

BT are required to offer the fibre service on an equivalency of access basis.

---------- Post added at 18:18 ---------- Previous post was at 18:10 ----------

they have investment in it and therefore is regulated by ofcom

They have no investment in BT and its regulation is nothing to do with any government ownership.

Have a read of http://www.btplc.com/Thegroup/RegulatoryandPublicaffairs/RegulationsintheUK/index.htm

[AndyCalling]

BT are regulated because they were a massive state monopoly that was privatised and the hope was to avoid a massive state created private monopoly. Regulation has taken the edge off, but because the privatisation was done very poorly (big discussion, but clearly true) it has achieved very little. The massive jump in phone costs since Ofcom reduced regulation a short while back proves this. The other companies are so small compared to BT that they have all followed along as sure as if the prices were fixed. Not good.

BT are a very poor comparetor. VM made their network (or the cable companies they bought up did). To force them to let other companies use it would be like forcing a Tesco branch to sell ASDA food as well because there was no ASDA near by. Ridiculous.

The only way to do this would be to declare VM a monopoly (but with competition so fierce from BT and Sky I don't see that happening) and force them to sell the cable infrastructure to a separate company who would not be allowed to be a service provider, sort of like a Railtrack or Transco for the cable industry. Or the cable network could be nationalised of course and private media providers would all be allowed access. VM would likely go to the wall at that point, at least their cable arm would.

[craigj2k12]

BT are regulated because they were a massive state monopoly that was privatised and the hope was to avoid a massive state created private monopoly. Regulation has taken the edge off, but because the privatisation was done very poorly (big discussion, but clearly true) it has achieved very little. The massive jump in phone costs since Ofcom reduced regulation a short while back proves this. The other companies are so small compared to BT that they have all followed along as sure as if the prices were fixed. Not good.

BT are a very poor comparetor. VM made their network (or the cable companies they bought up did). To force them to let other companies use it would be like forcing a Tesco branch to sell ASDA food as well because there was no ASDA near by. Ridiculous.

The only way to do this would be to declare VM a monopoly (but with competition so fierce from BT and Sky I don't see that happening) and force them to sell the cable infrastructure to a separate company who would not be allowed to be a service provider, sort of like a Railtrack or Transco for the cable industry. Or the cable network could be nationalised of course and private media providers would all be allowed access. VM would likely go to the wall at that point, at least their cable arm would.

It would never happen, but I would like to see what Be* could do with DOCSIS3 :D

[pip08456]

It would never happen, but I would like to see what Be* could do with DOCSIS3 :D

Let's wait and see what they can do with FTTC via BT. It is being considered but no announcement yet but I fully expect it to happen.

The whole point in my going to Infinity now, saved £i30 on the line install as well. Ok an 18 mth contract but by the time that's run it's course Be should be up and running.

[craigj2k12]

Let's wait and see what they can do with FTTC via BT. It is being considered but no announcement yet but I fully expect it to happen.

The whole point in my going to Infinity now, saved £i30 on the line install as well. Ok an 18 mth contract but by the time that's run it's course Be should be up and running.

10 years time i will be on Be* 500meg FTTH

[pip08456]

Calm down Craig!:D

[v0id]

10 years time i will be on Be* 500meg FTTH


Doubt it. The Be* brand probably won't even exist in 10 years time and will have fully merged into O2

[Hugh]

Ok the title is not true but...

Admin edit (Chris): It is now. ;)

With Fujitsu about to lay fibre and open it up to VM and Open reach laying fibre and opening it up(yes VM could and probably will use Open reach's fibre) will Virginmedia be letting others use its fibre network?

Sky have to give VM there channels even though sky have invested millions in building up the tv network. It all seems a little 1 way to me, VM want everything for nothing but don't want to give anyone access to its network.Reallly?

I will just change channels to watch Sky Atlantic - oh no, I can't, can I?;)

[Chrysalis]

I guess whats been VM's saving grace is that they have no monopoly in any area. Whilst BT do, I think its only a matter of time tho before VM will be made to open up their ducts.

[Maggy]

Well what would be the outcome if VM were forced to open it's cable network to competitors?

What would it mean for their customers and for VM's investors and for the products they provide.Indeed what would it do for the industry as a whole?

[Chris]

BT's call for Virgin to be treated as BT is being treated is a smokescreen. VM now has an operating profit but it is going to be many, many years before it has paid down the near-crippling debt incurred by the legacy cablecos that built its network.

The whole thing was built with private money and is nowhere near being a monopoly or otherwise attaining market-distorting influence. BT's suggestion that the two networks should be treated the same is pure fantasy.

[craigj2k12]

virgin should open the ducts to competitors, but their network shouldnt be wholesaled!!

[denphone]

Ok the title is not true but...

Admin edit (Chris): It is now. ;)

With Fujitsu about to lay fibre and open it up to VM and Open reach laying fibre and opening it up(yes VM could and probably will use Open reach's fibre) will Virginmedia be letting others use its fibre network?

Sky have to give VM there channels even though sky have invested millions in building up the tv network. It all seems a little 1 way to me, VM want everything for nothing but don't want to give anyone access to its network.

Virgin spent billions on building its fibre optic network and Sky apart from spending on content piggy backs on BT network instead of having to build its own infastructure.

[craigj2k12]

Virgin spent billions on building its fibre optic network and Sky apart from spending on content piggy backs on BT network instead of having to build its own infastructure.

yes, there are only 2 ISP's (Internet Service Providers) in the UK, that is Virgin Media and BT. Anyone else (sky, talktalk etc) are all internet service resellers and should be re-categorised accordingly

[Chris]

yes, there are only 2 ISP's (Internet Service Providers) in the UK, that is Virgin Media and BT. Anyone else (sky, talktalk etc) are all internet service resellers and should be re-categorised accordingly

On what basis do you say this?

[weesteev]

virgin should open the ducts to competitors, but their network shouldnt be wholesaled!!

That's the same thing!

Virgins network was built to be bespoke from scratch so there's not a whole lot of available duct space at a core level. Sub-ducting is the only option but this restricts the amount of cable that can be used.

One thing to consider... Virgins core network runs almost parallel to BT's. There would be no commercial advantage to Virgin's network being opened as most providers using peering/leased lines already use Virgin or BT's core duct.

Wholesaling Virgins consumer network would be a bit tricky seeing as local access is already built to capacity demands. Any provider looking to offer the same service would have to build a complete overlay network which is pretty pointless.

---------- Post added at 14:48 ---------- Previous post was at 14:47 ----------

yes, there are only 2 ISP's (Internet Service Providers) in the UK, that is Virgin Media and BT. Anyone else (sky, talktalk etc) are all internet service resellers and should be re-categorised accordingly

Regardless of whether they are a reseller or a network builder, they are all ISP's and all abide by the same laws. The only difference is that BT and Virgin get to charge for access to their network but obligations dont change regardless of how you may classify them.