[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 27/07/10 12:01, John Williams wrote:
Whatever gave you the impression that any government policy, developed with the help of big industry, would ever be efficient and beneficial for any but those who already drag money out of customers pockets?On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 11:24 +0100, Henry Bremridge wrote:In-Reply-To:<1280219638.9090.19.camel@subbass-desktop> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 09:33:58AM +0100, John Williams wrote:How about making the national telecommunications backbone public again, out of the hands of a private company. Paying shareholders is most likely the reason we have no/little fibre network.So far the Governments have taken the view that private companies paying profts are cheaper, faster and offer more choice than the Government themselves doing it. Certainly everything I have seen is that monolithic public enterprises have not been well known for their customer service and efficiency. Your experience may be different.I have never understood how paying an extra layer of "wages" to stockholders is better. Competition and efficiency can surely be achieved without that, but that is another issue entirely ;)
One of the reasons why BT drags its feet over BB etc is because it looses money and control with every BB setup. Free weekend and evening calls? With BB I should be able to get free 'calls' anytime of the day - I only have a phone because I have to pay BT (or someone) to have a telephone line to have BB - and to phone 152 to get the bloody thing fixed. Real competition would kill BT in a couple of years but the government has a legal duty to cover the pensions of 100,000 staff that took redundancy/early retirement around privatisation so theres no way it can let that happen.
Tom te tom te tom -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq