TiVo : Should Virgin Media and Cable & Wireless Worldwide merge?

[papa smurf]

no way do i want that shower letting back through the door

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

No idea as I've only ever been there three times and two of them was on company training many years ago..

I can't say I blame you

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by m419

No there is nothing Ofcom can do about it. BT's Cable networks are part of BT Global, a commercialised division of BT, like BT Cellnet used to be, therefore BT Global does not have the same rules to follow as its main division.

With regards to Milton Keynes, as I explained to you before, it lays in a few valleys restricting TV signals and there are lots of trees also obstructing the signals, therefore in the 70's Post Office Telephones (Now BT) built a Cable Television system to deal with that problem. By the late 80's the service began offering pay-tv channels with a set top box.

There is ongoing talks but there are no dates for when they will or when they can upgrade

Can VM lobby Ofcom to make the BT Cable network have the same regulation as BT Openreach?

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

Can VM lobby Ofcom to make the BT Cable network have the same regulation as BT Openreach?

Why don't you research that Alan, and then get back to us.

[m419]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

Can VM lobby Ofcom to make the BT Cable network have the same regulation as BT Openreach?

No they can't, if I wanted your house, do you think I could lobby the council and the government to give it to me?

No, the only reason why BT's main business has to follow certain rules set by Ofcom is because it is pre-dominant and stop a monopoly forming and to create more competition.

Cable and Wireless Communications has to follow the same rules in Guernsey. Jersey Telecom has to follow the same rules in Jersey and Manx Telecom has to follow the same rules in the Isle of Man as well as Kingston Communications in Hull, although competition is low because it is only a small area and the costs are probably not worth the investment in Hull which is why not many companies use the Kingston Communications infrastructure.

Cable TV is not seen as a pre-dominant or a must-have service, its seen as a commercialised product offering pay-tv and telecommunication services.

---------- Post added at 18:50 ---------- Previous post was at 18:48 ----------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPQyTi6Rmn0

That is about Milton Keynes Cable and the current situation.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by m419

No they can't, if I wanted your house, do you think I could lobby the council and the government to give it to me?

No, the only reason why BT's main business has to follow certain rules set by Ofcom is because it is pre-dominant and stop a monopoly forming and to create more competition.

Cable and Wireless Communications has to follow the same rules in Guernsey. Jersey Telecom has to follow the same rules in Jersey and Manx Telecom has to follow the same rules in the Isle of Man as well as Kingston Communications in Hull, although competition is low because it is only a small area and the costs are probably not worth the investment in Hull which is why not many companies use the Kingston Communications infrastructure.

Cable TV is not seen as a pre-dominant or a must-have service, its seen as a commercialised product offering pay-tv and telecommunication services.

---------- Post added at 18:50 ---------- Previous post was at 18:48 ----------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPQyTi6Rmn0

That is about Milton Keynes Cable and the current situation.

The News report talked about Ofcom getting involved to try and solve the problem in Milton Keynes, any chance of that happening?

[m419]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

The News report talked about Ofcom getting involved to try and solve the problem in Milton Keynes, any chance of that happening?

No

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by m419

No

Thats a shame!

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

no way do i want that shower letting back through the door

Shower being the word. They raped the company for anything they could get then dumped us in the brown stuff

[m419]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Shower being the word. They raped the company for anything they could get then dumped us in the brown stuff

They tried to take over Telewest, when Telewest wouldn't give in, the sold up to NTL, that's one of the reasons they were so fast to sell One2One so that Cable and Wireless could takeover Telewest.

I'm still amazed that NTL was able to get away with borrowing so much money and doing agressive takeovers when they didn't have a penny, that's why the Cable industry has never done well(compared to satellite tv), too many takeovers and change of ownership as well as borrowing too much money.

[Kymmy]

Originally Posted by m419

They tried to take over Telewest, when Telewest wouldn't give in, the sold that's why the Cable industry has never done well(compared to satellite tv), too many takeovers and change of ownership as well as borrowing too much money.

You can't compare the two as far as broadcasting infrastructure.. Sky do not own the sats that it broadcasts on instead they just hire the transponders where as cable companies have to create it's own cable network.. Which means that the cable industries costs will be more at startup and on expansion

[m419]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

You can't compare the two as far as broadcasting infrastructure.. Sky do not own the sats that it broadcasts on instead they just hire the transponders where as cable companies have to create it's own cable network.. Which means that the cable industries costs will be more at startup and on expansion

Oh of course. However, most of the American/Canadian companies like Videotron had the money to build a cable network in the areas it was awarded a licence. However, various companies bought each other usually on borrowed money. And rather than focusing on Content and Customer Care, they focused too much on buying each other out. Telewest out of all of them was probably the best at what it did in terms of investing in tv content,product development and customer care. NTL was a big flop at being a content provider most likely because of the debts and at the time many franchises were still analogue and in the digital areas, there was no Video on demand.

[LexDiamond]

Originally Posted by m419

Oh of course. However, most of the American/Canadian companies like Videotron had the money to build a cable network in the areas it was awarded a licence. However, various companies bought each other usually on borrowed money. And rather than focusing on Content and Customer Care, they focused too much on buying each other out. Telewest out of all of them was probably the best at what it did in terms of investing in tv content,product development and customer care. NTL was a big flop at being a content provider most likely because of the debts and at the time many franchises were still analogue and in the digital areas, there was no Video on demand.

Shows what a great job VM have done

[m419]

Originally Posted by LexDiamond

Shows what a great job VM have done

I just see it as complete madness, NTL and Telewest should have stayed as they were, just NTL running everything whilst paying a big tax to Virgin for the use of the brand name

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by m419

They tried to take over Telewest, when Telewest wouldn't give in, the sold up to NTL, that's one of the reasons they were so fast to sell One2One so that Cable and Wireless could takeover Telewest.

I'm still amazed that NTL was able to get away with borrowing so much money and doing agressive takeovers when they didn't have a penny, that's why the Cable industry has never done well(compared to satellite tv), too many takeovers and change of ownership as well as borrowing too much money.

They should have merged to form one company in the late-80s, not in 2006. Then it would have competed better than Sky/BSB/BSkyB/BT. The UK just was not big enough to sustain serveral cable companies!

---------- Post added at 08:44 ---------- Previous post was at 08:42 ----------

Originally Posted by m419

Oh of course. However, most of the American/Canadian companies like Videotron had the money to build a cable network in the areas it was awarded a licence. However, various companies bought each other usually on borrowed money. And rather than focusing on Content and Customer Care, they focused too much on buying each other out. Telewest out of all of them was probably the best at what it did in terms of investing in tv content,product development and customer care. NTL was a big flop at being a content provider most likely because of the debts and at the time many franchises were still analogue and in the digital areas, there was no Video on demand.

Remember, they were the ones that lanuched TVDrive (Now V+)!

---------- Post added at 08:44 ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 ----------

Originally Posted by m419

I just see it as complete madness, NTL and Telewest should have stayed as they were, just NTL running everything whilst paying a big tax to Virgin for the use of the brand name

Do you suggest that VM should rename itself?