Bulldog resubmits BT complaint

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/30/bt_bulldog_llu/

Dispute over LLU.

BT refuses to give Bulldog the same level of service
for Partial Private Circuits as it does to itself.

Oh well, time to break it all up and have
regional companies as well as separation between
exchange owners and local loop owners, and to put
it all to competitive tender like in other countries.

"7" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:H7B2e.107$(E-Mail Removed)...
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/30/bt_bulldog_llu/
>
> Dispute over LLU.
>
> BT refuses to give Bulldog the same level of service
> for Partial Private Circuits as it does to itself.
>
> Oh well, time to break it all up and have
> regional companies as well as separation between
> exchange owners and local loop owners, and to put
> it all to competitive tender like in other countries.
>

And have an absolute dogs breakfast of a 'network'....

uni-berlin.de!individual.net sock puppet wrote:

>
> "7" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:H7B2e.107$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/30/bt_bulldog_llu/
>>
>> Dispute over LLU.
>>
>> BT refuses to give Bulldog the same level of service
>> for Partial Private Circuits as it does to itself.
>>
>> Oh well, time to break it all up and have
>> regional companies as well as separation between
>> exchange owners and local loop owners, and to put
>> it all to competitive tender like in other countries.
>>
>
> And have an absolute dogs breakfast of a 'network'....


Or alternatively achieve 100% better networks with SLAs never before
attainable, but as currently provided by private companies
with best practice and better technology and be on a par
with international peers for rollout of services.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:15:07 GMT, 7
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>uni-berlin.de!individual.net sock puppet wrote:
>
>>
>> "7" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:H7B2e.107$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/30/bt_bulldog_llu/
>>>
>>> Dispute over LLU.
>>>
>>> BT refuses to give Bulldog the same level of service
>>> for Partial Private Circuits as it does to itself.
>>>
>>> Oh well, time to break it all up and have
>>> regional companies as well as separation between
>>> exchange owners and local loop owners, and to put
>>> it all to competitive tender like in other countries.
>>>
>>
>> And have an absolute dogs breakfast of a 'network'....
>
>
>Or alternatively achieve 100% better networks with SLAs never before
>attainable, but as currently provided by private companies
>with best practice and better technology and be on a par
>with international peers for rollout of services.

Yes, I imagine your utopian idea of a free market will see all
providers clamouring to service rural Shropshire, Devon & Cornwall,
Wales, Scotland, East Anglia, the Cotswolds, Cumbria, the Yorkshire
Dales and Derbyshire with high speed access.

"7" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%pG2e.501$(E-Mail Removed).. .
> uni-berlin.de!individual.net sock puppet wrote:
>
> >
> > "7" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:H7B2e.107$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/30/bt_bulldog_llu/
> >>
> >> Dispute over LLU.
> >>
> >> BT refuses to give Bulldog the same level of service
> >> for Partial Private Circuits as it does to itself.
> >>
> >> Oh well, time to break it all up and have
> >> regional companies as well as separation between
> >> exchange owners and local loop owners, and to put
> >> it all to competitive tender like in other countries.
> >>
> >
> > And have an absolute dogs breakfast of a 'network'....
>
>
> Or alternatively achieve 100% better networks with SLAs never before
> attainable, but as currently provided by private companies
> with best practice and better technology and be on a par
> with international peers for rollout of services.
>

Ah, you're thinking of the railways....

P.

62.249.230.43 Muxton wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:15:07 GMT, 7
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>uni-berlin.de!individual.net sock puppet wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "7" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:H7B2e.107$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/30/bt_bulldog_llu/
>>>>
>>>> Dispute over LLU.
>>>>
>>>> BT refuses to give Bulldog the same level of service
>>>> for Partial Private Circuits as it does to itself.
>>>>
>>>> Oh well, time to break it all up and have
>>>> regional companies as well as separation between
>>>> exchange owners and local loop owners, and to put
>>>> it all to competitive tender like in other countries.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And have an absolute dogs breakfast of a 'network'....
>>
>>
>>Or alternatively achieve 100% better networks with SLAs never before
>>attainable, but as currently provided by private companies
>>with best practice and better technology and be on a par
>>with international peers for rollout of services.
>
> Yes, I imagine your utopian idea of a free market will see all
> providers clamouring to service rural Shropshire, Devon & Cornwall,
> Wales, Scotland, East Anglia, the Cotswolds, Cumbria, the Yorkshire
> Dales and Derbyshire with high speed access.


BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAAAAHHAAAH!

Thats sounds REMARKABLY like a Muxton plan.
More reasons for me to sack you Mr. Muxton.