3 ms·

>The author advocates for treating telecom infrastructure like public utilities, but then says that competition is the answer. These are not compatible ideas!

>The author advocates for treating telecom infrastructure like public utilities, but then says that competition is the answer. These are not compatible ideas! Why not? I can choose to get my electricity and gas from any of about 6 different companies, and water from at least 4. They still come in through the same cables and pipes, but price and packaging varies. >The author suggests that the cable companies should be forced to lease out their hybrid fiber-coax networks to competitors. Again, here, BT have to do that as part of being able to have a (near-[1])monopoly on building those networks in the first place. That means people can get fibre to the cabinet/premises without having to pay for BT's overpriced and underreliable service, even if it runs over their fibre network for the last mile. [1] BT have a near-monopoly nationwide, while some areas have their own local networks in addition, but these can not be nationwide. Virgin (formerly NTL/Telewest) have a parallel national network, which uses coax for the last mile more like US cable[2], but has a far lower overall availability, being in a general case only available in cities and major towns, and in many of those then only in certain areas of them. [2] BT's network is fibre to the cabinet with copper from the cabinet to premises in most populated areas now(up to 80 mbit), with some lucky area having fibre to the premises(up to 1 gbit), and rural/undersubscribed areas having copper to the cabinet (generally, maximum rates of ~12mbit or worse; many can only get 0.5 mbit). Virgin's network can generally get 100mbit to most/all premises it serves, which is a far more limited subset of BT's. Local ones vary wildly and may be anything up to 10gbit, but are generally around 100mbit.

breischl 13y ago
>>I can choose to get my electricity and gas from any of about 6 different companies, and water from at least 4. Huh, seriously? I don't think I've ever lived anywhere that didn't have monopoly gas, electric, water and sewer providers. Monopoly trash pickup is not that uncommon either. Perhaps that's a UK vs. US thing.
- jonnathanson 13y ago
  It struck me as weird, too. I dunno. I've lived in or spent time pretty much all over the US in the last 10 years, and as far as I could tell, I've never had a choice in my local water provider. Gas and electric, usually not, though I suppose there are places where some choice is available.
  - blueskin_ 13y ago
    A situation like that would probably induce legislation or regulation to prevent price gouging. There are a few areas where it happens, e.g. in Hull there is only one ISP, who are by all accounts terrible, but can afford to be as there is no competition.
    - jonnathanson 13y ago
      With water, yes, it's heavily regulated as a public utility. Gas and electrical is a more interesting story. Here in California, we've had some adventures with deregulation of electricity (while still maintaining natural monopolies over provision). It was a complete clusterfuck.
      - rayiner 13y ago
        Decoupling the lines from the power-generation works okay as long as you have excess power generation capacity. E.g. California-style deregulation worked fine in Illinois.
        AnthonyMouse 13y ago
        Power generation also has the problem that building new generation capacity is extremely expensive and takes years or decades. The generating companies in California used that to their advantage by shutting down quite a lot of existing generating capacity so that there would be a supply shortage that the market couldn't respond to quickly and that predictably caused prices to skyrocket. It isn't likely that would be repeated in the market for interconnection because it's a lot faster and cheaper for a competitor to run a strand of fiber to a central office than to build a multi-GW power generating station.
- Consultant32452 13y ago
  Where I live I can pay a small premium to have my power generated by renewable sources. Electrons are fungible on the grid so I assume they have it worked out on the back-end of the provider just supplying X load to the grid.
  - blueskin_ 13y ago
    Yep, it's a fairly complex (as in, I don't understand it fully, although I've read a little) interaction of subsidies, varying prices, and the same of standby capacity (i.e. not actual capacity, but the ability to ramp up to generate x GW in y seconds should it be needed, to cover spikes - generally by gas power stations, which are able to vary output power far more quickly than most types, and by pumped storage, which can release up to a certain amount of energy per day for very short, large spikes, for example one one caused by people putting the kettle on when popular TV shows finish). Most of the trading is automated and humans aren't involved, as prices are being constantly renegotiated as demand changes, and supply may also be throttled down or up for fuel-consuming non-nuclear sources (nuclear runs as close to max output as they can due to running costs being consistent through output levels, and fuel costs being negligible in any case) to maximise profit - generally by increasing output as prices rise, but for wind and other renewables, sometimes output is artificially limited as a way of manipulating subsidies, which can actually be more profitable for the operators if less power is sold under the right grid conditions. All the data is open, which lets some interesting sites appear, such as http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/index.php http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/index.php . Mousing over the source numbers shows a brief overview, and the site also includes international purchase/sale data.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
rayiner 13y ago
The BT situation is very different, though. BT started out as a government-owned corporation. When it was privatized, the government developed an incentive scheme to ensure that the company had sufficient returns on its investment to continue to upgrade its network, and wrote that into the prospectus.

breischl 13y ago

>>I can choose to get my electricity and gas from any of about 6 different companies, and water from at least 4. Huh, seriously? I don't think I've ever lived anywhere that didn't have monopoly gas, electric, water and sewer providers. Monopoly trash pickup is not that uncommon either. Perhaps that's a UK vs. US thing.

jonnathanson 13y ago
It struck me as weird, too. I dunno. I've lived in or spent time pretty much all over the US in the last 10 years, and as far as I could tell, I've never had a choice in my local water provider. Gas and electric, usually not, though I suppose there are places where some choice is available.
- blueskin_ 13y ago
  A situation like that would probably induce legislation or regulation to prevent price gouging. There are a few areas where it happens, e.g. in Hull there is only one ISP, who are by all accounts terrible, but can afford to be as there is no competition.
  - jonnathanson 13y ago
    With water, yes, it's heavily regulated as a public utility. Gas and electrical is a more interesting story. Here in California, we've had some adventures with deregulation of electricity (while still maintaining natural monopolies over provision). It was a complete clusterfuck.
    - rayiner 13y ago
      Decoupling the lines from the power-generation works okay as long as you have excess power generation capacity. E.g. California-style deregulation worked fine in Illinois.
      - AnthonyMouse 13y ago
        Power generation also has the problem that building new generation capacity is extremely expensive and takes years or decades. The generating companies in California used that to their advantage by shutting down quite a lot of existing generating capacity so that there would be a supply shortage that the market couldn't respond to quickly and that predictably caused prices to skyrocket. It isn't likely that would be repeated in the market for interconnection because it's a lot faster and cheaper for a competitor to run a strand of fiber to a central office than to build a multi-GW power generating station.
Consultant32452 13y ago
Where I live I can pay a small premium to have my power generated by renewable sources. Electrons are fungible on the grid so I assume they have it worked out on the back-end of the provider just supplying X load to the grid.
- blueskin_ 13y ago
  Yep, it's a fairly complex (as in, I don't understand it fully, although I've read a little) interaction of subsidies, varying prices, and the same of standby capacity (i.e. not actual capacity, but the ability to ramp up to generate x GW in y seconds should it be needed, to cover spikes - generally by gas power stations, which are able to vary output power far more quickly than most types, and by pumped storage, which can release up to a certain amount of energy per day for very short, large spikes, for example one one caused by people putting the kettle on when popular TV shows finish). Most of the trading is automated and humans aren't involved, as prices are being constantly renegotiated as demand changes, and supply may also be throttled down or up for fuel-consuming non-nuclear sources (nuclear runs as close to max output as they can due to running costs being consistent through output levels, and fuel costs being negligible in any case) to maximise profit - generally by increasing output as prices rise, but for wind and other renewables, sometimes output is artificially limited as a way of manipulating subsidies, which can actually be more profitable for the operators if less power is sold under the right grid conditions. All the data is open, which lets some interesting sites appear, such as http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/index.php http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/index.php . Mousing over the source numbers shows a brief overview, and the site also includes international purchase/sale data.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

rayiner 13y ago

The BT situation is very different, though. BT started out as a government-owned corporation. When it was privatized, the government developed an incentive scheme to ensure that the company had sufficient returns on its investment to continue to upgrade its network, and wrote that into the prospectus.