As the Telegraph reports this morning:
BT has rescued TalkTalk from administration in a £400m deal that raises competition concerns.
The FTSE 100 telecoms giant has announced a deal to take over the struggling broadband provider, which had been on the verge of collapse.
TalkTalk, which reported revenues of £1.2bn last year, serves 2.5 million customers.
Why is this relevant? There are several good reasons for noting it.
Firstly, competition in this sector is failing. A company with a significant turnover and a large customer base cannot survive. There is good reason for that. The supply of internet services in a country like the UK represents a natural monopoly because the duplication of the cabling required to get internet into most houses in this country cannot be achieved affordably, and so any veneer of competition is virtually meaningless.
Secondly, questions about the failure of competition do naturally arise as a result.
Thirdly, the old BT monopoly is reappearing.
Fourthly, as a matter of fact, current regulation is inappropriate. I recently renewed a contract with BT, and although they reduced my price to encourage me to sign again, the contract included what are likely to be above-average inflation price increases throughout its duration, and this is exploitative.
So my necessary response to what is happening is that something as critical to our national infrastructure as the supply of internet services should be under state control. To have it otherwise makes no sense at all. Thatcher got the privatisation of BT wrong.
The only question is, when will this be admitted, and when will regulation appropriate to the circumstances, which makes it apparent that there is no real competition and no room for exploitation, going to be introduced to lay the groundwork for renationalisation?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Wires (fibre) vs service provision.
In the 1980s BT developed “blown fibre” which allowed fibre cables to be, literally, blown down a duct. The idea was to install fibre across the UK. Thatcher, the imbecile, quashed it. & fibre-based systems in the 1990s and 2000s made slow progress against assorted vested interests that wanted ADSL. There is a good argument to pull BT into public ownership, get a grip on its cost-structures and install fibre everywhere. The European Commission had a study that showed that, in the 1990s, had BT ripped out ALL of the twisted pair cables and replaced with fibre (& suitable terminals) – it would have made a profit, just FROM THE SALE OF THE COPPER. But no. Politics got in the way, as per.
In terms of how to operate the system – the Swedes since forever, have had publicly owned last-mile comms with service suppliers competing at the local switch for customers. Will the Brits learn from this? probably not. The politicos are far far too stupid/ignorant and vsted interests + the usual suits, will get in the way.
Much to agree with and thank you.
Back in the noughties in my DPI campaigning days, I helped with others to pay for counsel’s opinion on their non- consensual DPI shenanigans with websites such as mine, and got involved in lengthy communications with their then General Counsel. Their CEO at the time was one (Baroness)Dido Harding (of Jockey Club and Cheltenham racecourse/Covid fame and husband of John Penrose) after they split from Carphone Warehouse. What a can of worms that was. As for StalkStalk data breaches, the 300 word limit is against me.
Hearing that BT are taking them over produces in me, similar emotions to those that would be provoked on hearing that Ronnie Biggs had gone to live with the Kray twins.
I think I’ll stick with Zen.
Tell me why I am not surprised by this?
We’ve had perfectly good pavements and roads dug up and made ugly and dangerous for privatization and we have ended with a monopoly-like situation any way.
So what was all that all about eh?
I’ll tell you: it was about transferring assets to the private sector where a lot Thatcher’s minsters came from. And the City – setting up the buyout-loans – well, they’d never had it so good had they?
Don’t you find all a bit ‘hollow’?
I do…………………..
It doesn’t matter though – especially to the 9 million suckers who apparently tuned into celebrity Traitors on BBC.
I am pleased to say I have never watched Traitors and never will.