5 ms·

Since there are multiple competing fibre companies, won't nationalising one company and offering "the fastest fibre free to all" bankrupt all of the other compa

by robjan 7y ago

Since there are multiple competing fibre companies, won't nationalising one company and offering "the fastest fibre free to all" bankrupt all of the other companies?

cyborgx7 7y ago
And it would lead to everybody having the fastest fibre for free. What is wrong with bankrupting companies that aren't needed anymore?
- ablation 7y ago
  At a guess, I would hazard the thousands of people who would become unemployed? And not all be able to immediately go and work for the 'British Broadband Corporation'? That's one negative side effect.
  - cyborgx7 7y ago
    So we should have worse, more expensive internet instead, to keep people in positions that aren't necessary? That seems like a terrible idea. Presumably a Labour Manifesto with this policy in it, would also include a bunch of provisions for unemployed people.
    - ablation 7y ago
      Presumably taxing people more to support them? I don't have a dog in this fight. But probably wise not to infer there aren't negative consequences if all bar one broadband companies get shuttered in a country.
      - cyborgx7 7y ago
        I would gladly vote for paying all employees of all ISPs their current salary from taxes for a while, if it meant free, nationalized fast fiber in every home.
        entropea 7y ago
        Creates more jobs, spreads knowledge, enables entertainment, connects the world. I'd say it's a great investment anywhere for society.
  - deogeo 7y ago
    By that logic, we should ban the internet altogether, and thus create more jobs for postal workers.
    - ablation 7y ago
      No, that's incorrect.
- sjoebergco 7y ago
  *cheapest fiber for free
  - cyborgx7 7y ago
    I was using the words of the comment I responded to. If the fibre was of inferior quality, that would be the space for other companies to compete in.
    - robjan 7y ago
      I was quoting directly from the article "It’s time to make the very fastest full-fibre broadband free to everybody, in every home in every corner of our country".
- piker 7y ago
  > the fastest fibre Hard to argue with that conclusion when there's only one option.
  - deogeo 7y ago
    You skipped a few steps. If it's not the fastest, then other companies wouldn't go bankrupt, since they're offering something better. I.e. it would be the only option only if other companies bring nothing better to the table.
- robjan 7y ago
  The first fibre in the UK came when a company saw that BT's provision was substandard. In situations like this, competition is actually good.
ollie87 7y ago
Like healthcare in the UK, private companies presumably won't go out of business but will instead offer a more expensive alternative for those willing to pay. An example I have is my Dad who at 60 needs a double need replacement, the NHS standard is to give him a full replacement free at the point of access for his knee that is totally shot. But he'll only get a partial replacement on the one that's not totally buggered. Well he didn't want that - he wants both doing to the same level because he's still very active, so he's going private in this case. Did he have to? No. But he wanted something above what the NHS was offering. And it's no slight on the NHS, he used them when he had cataracts around five years ago without any issue - his wait time was only a few weeks from the referral too. I would probably be willing to pay for a better connection that what the government would provide as standard if offered because I spend my entire life online, I'm sure there will still be private ISP options with USPs to suit how I use the internet. In the end that could easily give consumers more choice than they get now in areas that have poor coverage (where they usually get the option of a <4mb ADSL connection or 3/4G Celluar). Instead of areas where they can get Virgin Media, FTTP, FTTC, or 5G coverage. We still have insurance companies and private healthcare here, it's just most people don't use it because what we pay for any way is good enough. So then the private ISPs just have to offer something better.

by robjan 7y ago

Since there are multiple competing fibre companies, won't nationalising one company and offering "the fastest fibre free to all" bankrupt all of the other companies?

cyborgx7 7y ago

And it would lead to everybody having the fastest fibre for free. What is wrong with bankrupting companies that aren't needed anymore?

ablation 7y ago
At a guess, I would hazard the thousands of people who would become unemployed? And not all be able to immediately go and work for the 'British Broadband Corporation'? That's one negative side effect.
- cyborgx7 7y ago
  So we should have worse, more expensive internet instead, to keep people in positions that aren't necessary? That seems like a terrible idea. Presumably a Labour Manifesto with this policy in it, would also include a bunch of provisions for unemployed people.
  - ablation 7y ago
    Presumably taxing people more to support them? I don't have a dog in this fight. But probably wise not to infer there aren't negative consequences if all bar one broadband companies get shuttered in a country.
    - cyborgx7 7y ago
      I would gladly vote for paying all employees of all ISPs their current salary from taxes for a while, if it meant free, nationalized fast fiber in every home.
      - entropea 7y ago
        Creates more jobs, spreads knowledge, enables entertainment, connects the world. I'd say it's a great investment anywhere for society.
- deogeo 7y ago
  By that logic, we should ban the internet altogether, and thus create more jobs for postal workers.
  - ablation 7y ago
    No, that's incorrect.
sjoebergco 7y ago
*cheapest fiber for free
- cyborgx7 7y ago
  I was using the words of the comment I responded to. If the fibre was of inferior quality, that would be the space for other companies to compete in.
  - robjan 7y ago
    I was quoting directly from the article "It’s time to make the very fastest full-fibre broadband free to everybody, in every home in every corner of our country".
piker 7y ago
> the fastest fibre Hard to argue with that conclusion when there's only one option.
- deogeo 7y ago
  You skipped a few steps. If it's not the fastest, then other companies wouldn't go bankrupt, since they're offering something better. I.e. it would be the only option only if other companies bring nothing better to the table.
robjan 7y ago
The first fibre in the UK came when a company saw that BT's provision was substandard. In situations like this, competition is actually good.

ollie87 7y ago

Like healthcare in the UK, private companies presumably won't go out of business but will instead offer a more expensive alternative for those willing to pay. An example I have is my Dad who at 60 needs a double need replacement, the NHS standard is to give him a full replacement free at the point of access for his knee that is totally shot. But he'll only get a partial replacement on the one that's not totally buggered. Well he didn't want that - he wants both doing to the same level because he's still very active, so he's going private in this case. Did he have to? No. But he wanted something above what the NHS was offering. And it's no slight on the NHS, he used them when he had cataracts around five years ago without any issue - his wait time was only a few weeks from the referral too. I would probably be willing to pay for a better connection that what the government would provide as standard if offered because I spend my entire life online, I'm sure there will still be private ISP options with USPs to suit how I use the internet. In the end that could easily give consumers more choice than they get now in areas that have poor coverage (where they usually get the option of a <4mb ADSL connection or 3/4G Celluar). Instead of areas where they can get Virgin Media, FTTP, FTTC, or 5G coverage. We still have insurance companies and private healthcare here, it's just most people don't use it because what we pay for any way is good enough. So then the private ISPs just have to offer something better.