By: MarkJ - 29 November, 2011 (8:06 AM) - Score: 1130 - Fixed Line Broadband
fibre optic cableeurope mapThe Vice-President of the European Commission's (EC) Digital Agenda strategy, Neelie Kroes, has told the European Competitive Telecommunications Association (ECTA) that one way to encourage incumbent telecoms firms, such as BT in the UK, to invest in an enhanced rollout of superfast fibre optic internet services would be to have them raise the cost of existing broadband services (copper based ones) instead of lowering them.

The move is part of Europe's wider Digital Agenda, which seeks to bring basic broadband to 100% of Europeans by 2013 and superfast 30Mbps+ services by 2020 (with 50% or more using a 100Mbps product).

However the new proposal is likely to send shudders down the spines of consumers, many of whom are already feeling the pinch from a harsh economic climate, and has been made because people who are already covered superfast services appear to be "unwilling to pay a premium" (low uptake).

Neelie Kroes, VP of the EC Digital Agenda, explained:

"Our target is to ensure that markets know that NGA investment is profitable for the long term. To hit that target, it seems to me that we will need more than one string to our bow.

So we are exploring whether copper prices could be gradually adjusted after a certain time. While allowing higher wholesale and retail prices for NGA products, and possibly also copper products for a transitional period, if operators commit to invest.

In fact, we should not forget that, in some places, copper and NGA are in a close competitive relationship. Where consumers haven't yet seen what fibre offers, they might still be unwilling to pay a premium. In that case, fibre prices mirror copper prices; and lowering copper access prices would send us in the wrong direction.

That's why we consider that, in places where there is a firm and credible commitment to invest in NGA, it may not be appropriate to reduce copper access prices. Instead they could be an anchor for higher returns on fibre. That is the first plank of the approach we are exploring.

Alongside that, you'll know that I want markets to be competitive. I want fair access for all, certainty for the industry, and the best deal for consumers."

In short, the EC effectively wants to force consumers into upgrading their broadband by making existing copper ADSL (up to 8Mbps) / ADSL2+ (up to 24Mbps) based internet connections more expensive and thus less attractive. Certainly that could work but it's definitely not going to win any popularity prizes.

Many unbundled ( LLU ) ISPs in the UK ( e.g. TalkTalk , Sky Broadband and O2 ) might also question the idea because copper is where the bulk of their internet revenue comes from. Meanwhile ISPs often feel that BT still fails to provide a flexible enough alternative to copper LLU for superfast broadband, which makes it harder to compete with the incumbent.

On top of that there's the inherent difficultly in ensuring that any profits from higher copper prices would go towards fibre and not merely back into dividends for shareholders or other areas. Furthermore copper prices are already rising, often through higher line rental charges and new ISP regulations.

Higher copper prices might also have the unwanted disadvantage of making older generation broadband services seem more attractive to the major operators, which could potentially reduce their incentive to invest in fibre. A better solution might be to use the profits from copper to reduce fibre prices but that's a tougher sell and one that only really works for big ISPs (economics of scale).

At any rate the best solution can usually be found in fostering measures that encourage a strong and naturally competitive market. In that sense Kroes does state that she wants to "explore the capacity to act" so that dominant Telco's do "not discriminate against competitors seeking access" and thus gain an "unfair advantage".

Neelie Kroes continued:

"Vertically integrated operators should not discriminate against competitors seeking access. They get an unfair advantage when competitors cannot get to wholesale offers before retail offers are launched. They inhibit competition when they give their own retail arms preferential access to commercially sensitive information.

I want to explore the capacity to act here. In particular, to act in a consistent way across the EU. Because it is troubling to have a geographical lottery where the same problem meets with different rules, different remedies, in different Member States."

Two related EC consultations, which covered many of the areas discussed above from wholesale access to fibre regulation, closed yesterday and Kroes has pledge to examine the input "carefully" before delivering some form of policy recommendation next year. Progress on superfast broadband hasn't been as fast as the EU would have liked so this has recently been given a higher priority.
Share: Slash., Stumble, Facebook, Digg, Blink, Reddit, Delicious, Diigo
Option: Link | Search

Comments: 12

asa logoMark
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 9:54 AM
Link to comment

Internet connectivity is way, way too cheap so IMO he's onto something.

But then, how could he or anyone guarantee that the increases would be reinvested since the incumbent is a private company? Don't see how that could be enforced.

We only have price controls because we have one private operator with an infrastructural monopoly so no market in half the country.

Dancing around the issue again I see.
asa logoSledgehammer
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 9:55 AM
Link to comment

BT will be overjoyed at this piece of news.

How long before we see BT start raising prices, a couple of months.

Will this be the turning point when a lot of people just ditch their B/B, and those considering fibre don't bother and stick with what they have at the moment.

Another right mess.

So much for FTTH/P and FTTC
asa logoMonkey needs Monkey pays
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 10:28 AM
Link to comment

Spot on - if you want faster speeds then you pay for it, simple really. Many Isp's have long since stuck it out on outdated usage models that simply dont meet the demands of todays consumer. They priced cheap as chips, dont make enough to invest back into the growing demands of those using the bandwidth (not the users fault) and are now faced with reality. Cosumers need to pay much more to get what they percieve to be a faster service and there lies another problem - apart from video streaming what do the majority of BB users actually need beyond 2Mb - 5Mb for?
asa logoMarkJ
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 10:36 AM
Link to comment

Neelie is a she ;) .

It might also be worth remembering that the prices could be raised but you wouldn't necessary get any extra quality back from the copper network, which is kind of the whole point.

One of the biggest problems with this idea is how you'd assure that the extra money goes back into fibre and how you'd handle enforcing such measures in the LLU market. I think it would take a long time to work those out.
asa logoBigBadJohn
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 10:39 AM
Link to comment

I wouldn't mind paying a higher price for BB if my exchange or line was garunteed to be upgraded to fibre. But why should I fork out for something I'm never likely to get so other people can have the pleasure ?
asa logoBob
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 11:20 AM
Link to comment

I dont see any fundermental problem with a slightly higher price to roll out fibre where it is not being done commercially although it would need to establish here it would be rolled out. It would be very unlikely that FTTH could be rolled out to rural areas as the cost would be to high. They should be looking at a wireless solution for these areas

The problem I see is that it will prety much only benefit BT. Everything points to the need to sepearte OPENRECH from BT

two ways of achieving this. Set up OPENREACH as a wholly owned BT subsidery company. Probably the simplest solution. The other solution is to float off Openreach as a totaly seperate company.
asa logoSomerset
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 12:40 PM
Link to comment

Bob - only benefit BT? What about all the ISPs that sell to user?
asa logoDeduction
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 6:23 PM
Link to comment

Who do those ISPs pay before they flog to users? Some here before defending BT need to think through their so called arguments.
asa logodragoneast
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 7:40 PM
Link to comment

The Government gives up on a 50p phone levy so the EC takes up the cause. Oh dear, haven't these politicians noticed that consumer prices are already rising everywhere and the electorates are fed up with it? Of course not, silly me, they're all on inflated expenses!
asa logoMartin
Posted: 29 November, 2011 - 10:34 PM
Link to comment

Here we go again !
We Market 1&2 customers have paid high (double in case of PlusNet ) prices for years, because it was suposed to bring LLU competition.
IT DID NOT !!!
IT WILL NOT, now that LLU is 'old' tech !

It won't work for fibre either !!!
When will Ofcom & politicians learn the facts of life ?
Regards,
Martin
asa logofor the same price?
Posted: 30 November, 2011 - 12:45 PM
Link to comment

Save time by selling your home to the same person you are buying your new home from.
Dream of a community where people exchange their homes for good, or join realxa.com.
Find people like you to change homes in the UK.
Search a free home exchange community in the UK.
asa logoDeduction
Posted: 30 November, 2011 - 4:42 PM
Link to comment

If only brain exchanges were available also eh!



Generated in 0.65216 seconds.
DB queries: 8

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved (Terms, Privacy Policy, Links (.), Live Chat & Website Rules).