A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) (uk.telecom.broadband) Discussion of broadband services, technology and equipment as provided in the UK. Discussions of specific services based on ADSL, cable modems or other broadband technology are also on-topic. Advertising is not allowed.

Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old August 14th 18, 11:20 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
7[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 509
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

R. Mark Clayton wrote:


Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow
---------------------------------------------------

Still trolling I see - don't you get sore wrists from all that er...
typing?


If BT offered me 330Mbps tomorrow, I'd only swap to it from 80Mbps if
the price was the same, so maybe they're right to ease off on G.Fast
rollout?


Yes something 7 does not seem to understand - people won't pay extra for
something they don't need.


Unfortunately, you are lying wahahahanker.

99% of people surveyed say faster Internet is better Internet.
Since fiber is 20x cheaper, they can get faster Internet
and/or pay less than BT (British Telecum) and VM full prices
and still be better off paying less than they do with phone
Internet cumpany and cable Internet cumpany offerings.
  #12  
Old August 15th 18, 09:19 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 526
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

On Tuesday, 14 August 2018 23:20:21 UTC+1, 7 wrote:
R. Mark Clayton wrote:


Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow
---------------------------------------------------

Still trolling I see - don't you get sore wrists from all that er...
typing?

If BT offered me 330Mbps tomorrow, I'd only swap to it from 80Mbps if
the price was the same, so maybe they're right to ease off on G.Fast
rollout?


Yes something 7 does not seem to understand - people won't pay extra for
something they don't need.


Unfortunately, you are lying wahahahanker.

99% of people surveyed say faster Internet is better Internet.
Since fiber is 20x cheaper, they can get faster Internet
and/or pay less than BT (British Telecum) and VM full prices
and still be better off paying less than they do with phone
Internet cumpany and cable Internet cumpany offerings.


99% of people would say that a Ferrari is a better car than a Ford Fiesta, but 1% will actually buy one.

Fibre is only cheaper per Mbps, cowboy firms like Hyperoprick charge double what BT do whilst claiming it only costs 5% of the cost of re-using in situ copper to put in gigabit fibre. Despite what should be a massive profit margin, their [published] balance sheet is an ocean of red ink...
  #13  
Old August 16th 18, 04:20 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
+++ATH0
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

On 2018-08-14 15:20, 7 wrote:
Since fiber is 20x cheaper,


What a load of horse cock. It might be cheaper to take a roll off the
shelf, but it costs as least as much to bury it, then you have to add
replacement termination equipment on top.
  #14  
Old August 21st 18, 12:39 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
7[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 509
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

+++ATH0 wrote:


Since fiber is 20x cheaper,


What a load of horse cock.


You are a fscking piece of lying shiite that has
no idea how the world works today.

It might be cheaper to take a roll off the
shelf, but it costs as least as much to bury it, then you have to add
replacement termination equipment on top.


All of which is recovered by year 2.

Today's machines lay 4km/h in countryside and several hundred
meters per day in urban with micro trenchers.
No need for traffic cones, just drive over the micro
trenches as its being laid!

  #15  
Old August 21st 18, 10:20 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 526
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

On Tuesday, 21 August 2018 00:39:20 UTC+1, 7 wrote:
+++ATH0 wrote:


Since fiber is 20x cheaper,


What a load of horse cock.


You are a fscking piece of lying shiite that has
no idea how the world works today.

It might be cheaper to take a roll off the
shelf, but it costs as least as much to bury it, then you have to add
replacement termination equipment on top.


All of which is recovered by year 2.

Today's machines lay 4km/h in countryside and several hundred
meters per day in urban with micro trenchers.
No need for traffic cones, just drive over the micro
trenches as its being laid!


Well until you cut through the sensor cables at a major junction...

A cowboy solution as advocated by your company just won't work.
  #16  
Old August 22nd 18, 12:13 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
7[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 509
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

R. Mark Clayton wrote:


Since fiber is 20x cheaper,

What a load of horse cock.


You are a fscking piece of lying shiite that has
no idea how the world works today.

It might be cheaper to take a roll off the
shelf, but it costs as least as much to bury it, then you have to add
replacement termination equipment on top.


All of which is recovered by year 2.

Today's machines lay 4km/h in countryside and several hundred
meters per day in urban with micro trenchers.
No need for traffic cones, just drive over the micro
trenches as its being laid!


Well until you cut through the sensor cables at a major junction...

A cowboy solution as advocated by your company just won't work.



Typical pone cumpany cabil cumpany troll talk.

Why do you trolls believe one junction is all that it takes?

Is it because fake fiber cumpanies like the ones you
represent have only one or two fibers between 'cabinet'
and exchange to create artificial scarcity?

Don't you know symmetric fiber companies lay thousands of
fibers in one go and have no idea what all that troll talk meanz?

  #17  
Old August 22nd 18, 01:57 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 526
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 00:13:02 UTC+1, 7 wrote:
R. Mark Clayton wrote:


Since fiber is 20x cheaper,

What a load of horse cock.

You are a fscking piece of lying shiite that has
no idea how the world works today.

It might be cheaper to take a roll off the
shelf, but it costs as least as much to bury it, then you have to add
replacement termination equipment on top.

All of which is recovered by year 2.

Today's machines lay 4km/h in countryside and several hundred
meters per day in urban with micro trenchers.
No need for traffic cones, just drive over the micro
trenches as its being laid!


Well until you cut through the sensor cables at a major junction...

A cowboy solution as advocated by your company just won't work.



Typical pone cumpany cabil cumpany troll talk.

Why do you trolls believe one junction is all that it takes?

Is it because fake fiber cumpanies like the ones you
represent have only one or two fibers between 'cabinet'
and exchange to create artificial scarcity?

Don't you know symmetric fiber companies lay thousands of
fibers in one go and have no idea what all that troll talk meanz?


You don't need to lay thousands of fibres in one go, just use a few and run them faster!
  #18  
Old September 1st 18, 11:58 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
7[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 509
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

R. Mark Clayton wrote:

On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 00:13:02 UTC+1, 7 wrote:
R. Mark Clayton wrote:


Since fiber is 20x cheaper,

What a load of horse cock.

You are a fscking piece of lying shiite that has
no idea how the world works today.

It might be cheaper to take a roll off the
shelf, but it costs as least as much to bury it, then you have to
add replacement termination equipment on top.

All of which is recovered by year 2.

Today's machines lay 4km/h in countryside and several hundred
meters per day in urban with micro trenchers.
No need for traffic cones, just drive over the micro
trenches as its being laid!

Well until you cut through the sensor cables at a major junction...

A cowboy solution as advocated by your company just won't work.



Typical pone cumpany cabil cumpany troll talk.

Why do you trolls believe one junction is all that it takes?

Is it because fake fiber cumpanies like the ones you
represent have only one or two fibers between 'cabinet'
and exchange to create artificial scarcity?

Don't you know symmetric fiber companies lay thousands of
fibers in one go and have no idea what all that troll talk meanz?


You don't need to lay thousands of fibres in one go, just use a few and
run them faster!


Which means buying multiplexers which makes the whole project more
expensive than dedicated fiber to each customer.

Dedicated fiber without the expense of multiplexers
is far more profitable.
Average install cost 150, and 30/m for Internet is still profit
within 2 years and clear profit of 250,000 after all costs
per 1000 customers. Neither BT (British Telecum) Openroach or VM
makes that amount after all deductions.







  #19  
Old September 2nd 18, 12:42 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
+++ATH0
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

On 2018-09-01 15:58, 7 wrote:
Dedicated fiber without the expense of multiplexers
is far more profitable.
Average install cost 150, and 30/m for Internet is still profit
within 2 years and clear profit of 250,000 after all costs
per 1000 customers. Neither BT (British Telecum) Openroach or VM
makes that amount after all deductions.


If only they had the incisive business acumen that you clearly
demonstrate here, they might be making a profit after all this time.
  #20  
Old September 2nd 18, 12:30 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 526
Default Wahahahanking with copper G.Fast cut back to G.Slow

On Sunday, 2 September 2018 00:42:36 UTC+1, +++ATH0 wrote:
On 2018-09-01 15:58, 7 wrote:
Dedicated fiber without the expense of multiplexers
is far more profitable.


Rubbish - you yourself point out how cheap multiplexors (optical switches) are and by the time you have paid to splice all the 100 fibres back at the exchange, you might as well have distributed the net - indeed you can create far greater resilience by concentrating nearer the customers AND linking the concentrators together, so that if a clumsy council workman digs through your shallow fibres then the traffic ca be dynamically re-routed.

Are you familiar with how this works at all?

Average install cost 150, and 30/m for Internet is still profit
within 2 years and clear profit of 250,000 after all costs
per 1000 customers. Neither BT (British Telecum) Openroach or VM
makes that amount after all deductions.


If only they had the incisive business acumen that you clearly
demonstrate here, they might be making a profit after all this time.


BT and VM are profitable, but according to their latest filed accounts Hyperoptic are [still] losing money hand over fist. (lost 48M so far, leaving a shareholders' deficit of nearly 12M - i.e. the company has lost all their money and then some).
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
G.Fast is G.Slow copper - no buyers - BT Openroach shiites itself 7[_2_] uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 3 January 14th 18 11:16 AM
No copper infrastruture in UK so why is G.Slow being rolled out by BT (British Paul Cummins uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 2 January 1st 18 04:02 PM
No copper infrastructure in UK so why is BT (British Telecum) Openroach installing 10mbit copper? 7[_2_] uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 30 December 31st 17 11:02 PM
Exceptionally slow ping times, slow DNS lookup and slow download on router Martin Underwood uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 1 January 24th 07 01:05 AM
Sipura / Linksys SPA1001 Back to back / sipgate Melodicminor uk.telecom.voip (UK VOIP) 8 September 14th 06 11:11 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2018 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.