Increase in Virgin Media prices

I've just been informed by Virgin Media that their broadband prices are
increasing by £1.50 a month from 1st April. Unfortunately, I can't do
anything about it, because they have a monopoly over the cable service (I
don't have a traditional phone line).

Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain their monopoly
over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up theirs over the
conventional phone network?

--
Guy Barry

"Guy Barry" wrote in message news:WTvYq.13567$(E-Mail Removed)2...


Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain their monopoly
over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up theirs over the
conventional phone network?


Not understanding you on this, BT have recently installed a fiber network
here and selling it as Infinity other ISP use it too.
Regards
David

"Guy Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:WTvYq.13567$(E-Mail Removed)2...
> I've just been informed by Virgin Media that their broadband prices are
> increasing by £1.50 a month from 1st April. Unfortunately, I can't do
> anything about it, because they have a monopoly over the cable service (I
> don't have a traditional phone line).
>
> Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain their monopoly
> over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up theirs over
> the
> conventional phone network?


You should try calling them and say you are going to give them notice. There
is a strong chance they will back down and not increase the price.

Peter Crosland

On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 17:18:29 -0000, "David" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>
>"Guy Barry" wrote in message news:WTvYq.13567$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>
>
>Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain their monopoly
>over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up theirs over the
>conventional phone network?
>
>
>Not understanding you on this, BT have recently installed a fiber network
>here and selling it as Infinity other ISP use it too.
>Regards
>David

Which is fine if you are in an Infinity cabled area - unfortunately
the vast majority of the country isn't

Jasper

On 08/02/2012 17:18, David wrote:
>
>
> "Guy Barry" wrote in message news:WTvYq.13567$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>
>
> Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain their monopoly
> over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up theirs over the
> conventional phone network?
>
>
> Not understanding you on this, BT have recently installed a fiber
> network here and selling it as Infinity other ISP use it too.
> Regards
> David

That's what he meant...
BT have to offer their copper and fibre networks to other ISPs.
Virgin can - and do - keep their cable network to themselves.

George

"George Weston" wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...

On 08/02/2012 17:18, David wrote:
>
>
> "Guy Barry" wrote in message news:WTvYq.13567$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>
>
> Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain their monopoly
> over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up theirs over
> the
> conventional phone network?
>
>
> Not understanding you on this, BT have recently installed a fiber
> network here and selling it as Infinity other ISP use it too.
> Regards
> David

That's what he meant...
BT have to offer their copper and fibre networks to other ISPs.
Virgin can - and do - keep their cable network to themselves.

Thanks now I understand.
Yes does not seem fair, but of course at present BT is FTTC and Virgin goes
all the way to home.
Is it Virgin not want to sub let to ISPs or are they not allowed to?
I would then expect ISPs to leave BT and go with Virgin provided money OK.
Regards
David

On 08/02/2012 20:51, David wrote:
>
>
> "George Weston" wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> On 08/02/2012 17:18, David wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Guy Barry" wrote in message news:WTvYq.13567$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>>
>>
>> Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain their
>> monopoly
>> over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up theirs
>> over the
>> conventional phone network?
>>
>>
>> Not understanding you on this, BT have recently installed a fiber
>> network here and selling it as Infinity other ISP use it too.
>> Regards
>> David
>
> That's what he meant...
> BT have to offer their copper and fibre networks to other ISPs.
> Virgin can - and do - keep their cable network to themselves.
>
> Thanks now I understand.
> Yes does not seem fair, but of course at present BT is FTTC and Virgin
> goes all the way to home.
> Is it Virgin not want to sub let to ISPs or are they not allowed to?
> I would then expect ISPs to leave BT and go with Virgin provided money OK.
> Regards
> David

Virgin doesn't want to.
In any case, Virgin's cable network only covers the big cities and towns
and I don't believe they have any plans to extend into less-profitable
territory.

"David" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:jguna0$a2c$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
> "George Weston" wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> On 08/02/2012 17:18, David wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Guy Barry" wrote in message
>> news:WTvYq.13567$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>>
>>
>> Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain
>> their monopoly
>> over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up
>> theirs over the
>> conventional phone network?
>>
>>
>> Not understanding you on this, BT have recently installed a
>> fiber
>> network here and selling it as Infinity other ISP use it too.
>> Regards
>> David
>
> That's what he meant...
> BT have to offer their copper and fibre networks to other ISPs.
> Virgin can - and do - keep their cable network to themselves.
>
> Thanks now I understand.
> Yes does not seem fair, but of course at present BT is FTTC and
> Virgin goes all the way to home.
> Is it Virgin not want to sub let to ISPs or are they not
> allowed to?
> I would then expect ISPs to leave BT and go with Virgin
> provided money OK.
> Regards
> David


Actually FTTH on Virgin is still in ...virgin... territory. FTTC
almost everywhere has been the standard for a decade or more, but
still coax to the home - so they can add a twisted pair for the
phone.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

"Guy Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:WTvYq.13567$(E-Mail Removed)2...
> I've just been informed by Virgin Media that their broadband prices are
> increasing by £1.50 a month from 1st April. Unfortunately, I can't do
> anything about it, because they have a monopoly over the cable service (I
> don't have a traditional phone line).
>
> Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain their monopoly
> over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up theirs over
> the
> conventional phone network?
>
> --
> Guy Barry
>
>

Basically because BT inherited a network installed at public expense,
whereas Virgin (or their predecessors) built theirs from scratch. BT
therefore has a universal service provision and must carry traffic to other
SP's.

"R. Mark Clayton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Guy Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:WTvYq.13567$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>> I've just been informed by Virgin Media that their broadband prices are
>> increasing by £1.50 a month from 1st April. Unfortunately, I can't do
>> anything about it, because they have a monopoly over the cable service (I
>> don't have a traditional phone line).
>>
>> Can anyone explain why Virgin have been allowed to maintain their
>> monopoly
>> over the cable network while BT have been forced to give up theirs over
>> the
>> conventional phone network?
>>
>> --
>> Guy Barry
>>
>>
>
> Basically because BT inherited a network installed at public expense,
> whereas Virgin (or their predecessors) built theirs from scratch. BT
> therefore has a universal service provision and must carry traffic to
> other SP's.

BT i.e. their share holders paid the goverment of the day for the network,
it was not inherited and the BT fibre network has also been built from
scratch.