Ofcom have published another consultation proposing to deregulate BT retail phone cost controls.


Quote:

Ofcom proposal to deregulate BT retail phone cost controls 22 years after price controls were first imposed when the UK telecoms market was liberalised, Ofcom is today publishing proposals to deregulate retail price controls on BT line rental and calls. Under the proposals – which are subject to public consultation – all phone companies, including BT Group plc, would be free to set their own prices and compete for customers in future. The changes would take effect from 1 August 2006. New technology and the growth of competition have transformed phone services over the last ten years; average call prices have fallen by more than 50% since 1996. Key developments in the market include:    * Competing providers: more than 10 million households use providers other than BT for their phone calls, including more than 4 million households on cable networks [source: Ofcom Communications Market Report February 2006]    * New technology: Industry estimates suggest that there are now more than 500,000 active Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) users in the UK. VoIP services offer a significantly lower-cost alternative to traditional fixed-line calls. As more than 10 million households now benefit from broadband connections, VoIP services are likely to grow rapidly over time.    * Competitive local access investment: Local Loop Unbundling enables a range of providers to offer customers voice, broadband and video services over existing phone lines. By February 2006 the number of lines unbundled exceeded 300,000. Given this, Ofcom believes it is now appropriate to consider allowing existing retail price controls to lapse as increasingly effective competition between providers continues to drive down costs to consumers. These developments are also taking place against a background of continued growth in the market for mobile services. 31% of all UK voice call minutes originated from mobile phones rather than from fixed-lines, from July to September 2005. [source: Ofcom Communications Market Report February 2006.] The proposals include important protections for vulnerable groups as well as specific pricing assurances from BT on key services including line rental. These assurances would remain in place until the end of 2007 and would be in addition to existing statutory requirements from BT under its Universal Service obligations. More details here.

With providers putting prices up over the last couple of years, what reassurances do we have that they won't do so in the future? Is Ofcom really living in a dream world?  ::)

It says "average call prices have fallen by more than 50% since 1996." Perhaps that statement should have a '*' by it and a little note saying "Excludes calls to 0845 and 0870 numbers."  ;D

It also fails to mention changes in line rental and its associated services. For those that were on BT Standard (see here), their line rental has effectively risen by 50%.

Dave wrote on Apr 14^th, 2006 at 11:34pm:

Is Ofcom really living in a dream world?

No More like A Nightmare on Elm Street world where Stephen "Freddy Kruger" Carter pretends all is well and beautiful in the telecoms world to dull and unsuspecting government ministers and telecoms punters whilst secretly make the vilest and most unspeakable plans to allow most ordinary customer calls to uk businesses to be converted into nightmarisly expensive hidden premium rate calls that he and his former henchmen (fellow directors at NTL) will not count in their basket of typical telecoms prices that they claim consumers are now paying. :o >:( >:( >:(

So these changes could take effect within less than six months, but 0870 will have to wait at least another 18 months. Normally I would end such a statement with a shocked face (:o), but it has gone beyond this.  :'(

As gdh82 says, Ofcom are a total disgrace and apparently stand for everything that is wrong in this country. I have absolutely no faith in the telecommunications industry and regard it as just a rip-off. I would much sooner return to having only BT to supply a service, as at least you knew where you stood.

Now we have a whole plethora of outlets who consider their marketing a way of fooling the masses. Engineering a telecommunications network comes way down the list of priorities.

Free is a complete load of rubbish. I don't expect a business to give me anything for free, not least a telecoms company. I have just today received a 1 month's free support from Laptops Direct. To get support I must phone an 0870 number.  ::)

My MP has thus far decided to ignore me with respect to the Early Day Motion put before Parliament on 0870 numbers used in government departments.

Finally finished my response to the numbering consultation  :-X [smiley=beer.gif] :-/ and feel like a drink or a lie down now!  As raised by kk and NGM recently, consultation fatigue is a real problem, not least because of our understandable concern that Ofcom will probably ignore us anyway  >:(

Having said that, I wanted to respond to the Deregulation of BT Cost Controls, but I realise the deadline is tight - Tuesday 30 May 2006 !

On the positive side, this consultation is very small and focused compared to the renumbering consultation and actually should be fairly straightforward to respond.  Having said that I would be grateful of any tips or pointers others could offer  ;)

Quoting from the consultation document it seems that Ofcom's proposal to remove pricing regulation on BT line rental and calls for consumers centres of four options:


Quote:

We have considered a number of options we could go for when the current control comes to an end at the end of July. We have set these options out below. ·      Option 1 – no control for line rental and calls for residential customers. ·      Option 2 – continue with the existing controls. ·      Option 3 – a control only on BT’s basic price for line rental. ·      Option 4 – no controls from August 2006 but an agreement by BT to protect low spenders. Our assessment We think that option 4 is the best option. We believe that the promises BT have given, (taking account of the amount of competition) will protect low spenders, and that changes in regulation, technology and the market should make sure that prices will stay low. For people on low incomes and with special needs, there will be other protection. We will review the situation in 2007. If competition has not developed enough or people have concerns over prices, we could consider reintroducing the price controls. We believe that ending the control is a major and very positive change for the telecoms market in the UK. However, many people may not be aware of this change or what it means for them. For this reason, we plan to begin a public information campaign to raise consumer awareness about the change.

And that Ofcom are seeking our responses to just two questions:


Quote:

We are particularly interested in your answers to these questions. We also welcome any other comments you want to give. A Do you think that there are other forms of regulation that we should consider? B Do you agree with our conclusion, and the assessment on which that conclusion is based? How to respond Phone prices affect us all, so please tell us what you think of our proposals. If you have any comments on the issues raised in this booklet, please e-mail your comments to geoff.brighton@ofcom.org.uk.

There's just 8 responses to this consultation so far:

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/retail/responses/

I intend to come back with some questions/comments once I've recovered  ;) ;D ;)

It seems to me that the concerns regarding deregulation are more to do with line rental than call costs.  Surely BT would not wish to increase there calls costs because they would lose customers to their competitors ?  Whereas further increases in their line rental (especially if hidden behind some call cost reductions) would be of concern, especially for people with a low usage/low income who would feel the increase disproportionately.

Given this then Option 3 – "a control only on BT’s basic price for line rental" sounds better than Ofcom's preferred Option 4.

Could I ask for some feedback on this ?

Ofcom's preferred option on this is Option 4 but having read the full document on the Options, it turns out that Ofcom want to remove the regulation surroundings things like call charges/line rental but keep the BT Light User Scheme and In Contact Plus.

They then state that they have agreed certain things with BT with regards to any increases in call charges/line rental but will not go into detail on what they have agreed with BT.  BT wish to keep it quiet/confidential and Ofcom have agreed.

So to put it another way, Ofcom would like us to choose option 4 and WE just hope to god that BT dont increase the price of their linerental/call charges and although Ofcom have some assurances from BT about price rises both BT and Ofcom refuse to go into detail.  This could mean that what Ofcom and BT have agreed together is that the linerental wont increase by £3 but we don't know.  On the other hand BT may have agreed not to increase it by no more than £1.

The whole point is that we don't have any idea on what has/hasn't been agreed but yet Ofcom would like us to choose option 4 and basically, from our point of view, we pray to god that what BT have agreed with Ofcom protects us consumers from yet another linerental increase or call charges increase.  So we should leave this in the hands of Ofcom despite not knowing what has been agreed.

Just some things that BT have increased:-

1.   Line rental on BT Together Option 1 from £10.50 to £11.00 per month
2.   Extension of daytime rate to start at 6am instead of 8am
3.   Minimum call charge from 5p to 5.5p (6p for business)
4.   Evening/weekend rate after 1 hour from 1p to 3p per minute
5.   Call charge to Speaking Clock 123 from 20p to 30p
6.   Minimum call charge on public payphones from 20p to 30p
7.   Introduction of £5 late payment charge
8.   Call charge to directory enquiries 118500 from 15p to 23p per minute plus 40p connection charge
9.   Ring back charge from 10p to 15p per use - chargeable even if not connected after 45 minutes trying
10. Introduction of call return fee of 6p for pressing 3 after 1471
11. Introduction of call return fee of 7.5p for pressing 0 after 1571
12. New installation connection fee increased from £75 to £125

Some of these increases weren't that long ago neither.

Now Ofcom would have us believe that the competitive pressure alone would mean that prices will go down but yet even before BT have their regulatory controls removed (well proposal to remove them), we can clearly see that prices have only gone up.

Where is the competitive pressure in that?  Shouldn't BT be thinking about being competitive and therefore avoiding increasing their prices?

One example is linerental.  BT increased their linerental by 50p to £11 and what did most of the competition do?  They of course just increased their line rental as well and Telewest even has a limit of 60minutes per call on their inclusive calls same as BT now whereas before it was unlimited.  Again is this being competitive?

bbb_uk wrote on May 25^th, 2006 at 6:22pm:

Just some things that BT have increased:- 1.   Line rental on BT Together Option 1 from £10.50 to £11.00 per month 2.   Extension of daytime rate to start at 6am instead of 8am 3.   Minimum call charge from 5p to 5.5p (6p for business) 4.   Evening/weekend rate after 1 hour from 1p to 3p per minute 5.   Call charge to Speaking Clock 123 from 20p to 30p 6.   Minimum call charge on public payphones from 20p to 30p 7.   Introduction of £5 late payment charge 8.   Call charge to directory enquiries 118500 from 15p to 23p per minute plus 40p connection charge 9.   Ring back charge from 10p to 15p per use - chargeable even if not connected after 45 minutes trying 10. Introduction of call return fee of 6p for pressing 3 after 1471 11. Introduction of call return fee of 7.5p for pressing 0 after 1571 12. New installation connection fee increased from £75 to £125 Some of these increases weren't that long ago neither. Now Ofcom would have us believe that the competitive pressure alone would mean that prices will go down but yet even before BT have their regulatory controls removed (well proposal to remove them), we can clearly see that prices have only gone up. One example is linerental.  BT increased their linerental by 50p to £11 and what did most of the competition do?  They of course just increased their line rental as well and Telewest even has a limit of 60minutes per call on their inclusive calls same as BT now whereas before it was unlimited.  Again is this being competitive?

Thanks bbb_uk.  Your post has highlighted to me the numerous ways in which BT can increase their prices other than the more obvious ppm of a call.

As you point out, the above increases have taken place under regulation - how does that work - are increases agreed with Ofcom first ?  Whereas if the matter was deregulated, would that mean in future  BT could increase prices as they see fit (without seeking Ofcom's agreeement) ?

So in terms of Ofcom's proposed options - would you like to see option 2 approved - continue with the existing controls ?

Finally you mentioned the BT Light User Scheme being retained.  I imagine this scheme has its positives but is it right that this is one of the few price plans which distinguishes call costs on a local and national basis ? (whereas for many others there's no longer a distinction anymore)  For me the local/national distinction  seems a relic of the past and in my response to the renumbering consultation I've called on Ofcom to abandon it so to help address the on-going misinformation regarding national rate and lo-call etc.

gdh82 wrote on May 26^th, 2006 at 8:18am:

As you point out, the above increases have taken place under regulation - how does that work - are increases agreed with Ofcom first ?

Yes.  As an example, the recent linerental increase was with permission of Ofcom.

Quote:

Whereas if the matter was deregulated, would that mean in future  BT could increase prices as they see fit (without seeking Ofcom's agreeement) ?

Yes.  Except Ofcom have some undisclosed assurances that some prices wouldn't increase to a certain amount.  As I mentioned BT & Ofcom are keeping confidential what these assurances are and exactly by how much (if any) BT can raise their call charges/linerental.

This is why I'm annoyed that Ofcom's preferred proposal (Option4) is one that it is basically keeping to itself but yet would like, ideally, for us to agree with it despite having no idea what assurances have been made!  As I said the assurances could be that linerental wont increase by no more than £1 or it could be by no more than £3.  It could be anything at all and we really have no idea.


Quote:

Finally you mentioned the BT Light User Scheme being retained.  I imagine this scheme has its positives but is it right that this is one of the few price plans which distinguishes call costs on a local and national basis ? (whereas for many others there's no longer a distinction anymore)

BT Light User Scheme is the only tariff that does disctinguishes between local and national but at the same time if you make very, very few calls (aimed at the older community) then you can have a linerental rebate of nearly 50% (or something similar) which could cut your linerental in half.  Those on BT Light User Scheme are prohibited from using other call carriers and having broadband.  Basically, in return for having nearly half price linerental, you do pay a few pence more for national calls.

If you make a lot of calls then you don't get any rebate in linerental and can be thrown of this tariff.  More info on BT's Light User Scheme here.

Incidentally, BT have tried to get rid of Light User Scheme and In Contact Plus possibly due to the fact its a loss making tariff from their point of view but Ofcom have forced them to keep these tariffs for those on very, very low incomes and the older community that may make very little calls.

At just under 50 pages, this is the shortest consultation we've seen in ages. Thanks to bbb_uk for that list of price increases. I have yet to read the document, but I will be including a timeline of shameful increases that have been allowed.

I was astounded to find out about the removal of BT Standard a couple of years ago. I have been further disgusted at the way in which this privatised company has been allowed to use covert 'micro' increases in price, leaving me paying 50% more for a basic telephone line than I did two years ago.  >:(

Dave wrote on May 26^th, 2006 at 4:16pm:

At just under 50 pages, this is the shortest consultation we've seen in ages. Thanks to bbb_uk for that list of price increases.

I'm afraid I can't take credit for compiling this list.  I found it on the MSE forum here where a MSE forum member by the name of AP posted this information.  I added new installation charges that had increased from £75 to £125.

My draft response:

Removal of BT price regulation in the retail telephone market is ideal, but only if true competition exists and that can only exist when true price transparency exists.

Price competition does exist for telephone calls to “01" and “02" UK telephone number and to calls to locations outside the UK.  The call cost to any UK location using companies such as www.18185.co.uk,   www.call18866.co.uk and www.call1899.com are free, save for a small connection fee of 3 or 4p.    Call to Australia, Brazil, Italy and USA (to name but a few) cost  1p per minute or less, using the above alternative companies.

The above, contrasts sharply with the cost of non-geographic revenue sharing numbers used in the UK.  - that is, numbers beginning with “084x, 087x,  070 or 09".

Although full price transparency does not exist with the  “09" range of  numbers, consumers are aware that calls beginning with “09" are more expensive than normal and are not included in various call packages (like BT’s option 2 or 3) and are NOT less expensive if an alternative supplier is used. No real competition exists in the “09" range of telephone numbers, but at least the fact that they are different in cost (and treated differently) to a normal call is widely understood.

Again price transparency does not exist with numbers beginning with “084x, 087x and 070" and they are also not included in call packages etc.. In the above number ranges, lack of competition is more damaging to the consumer, as consumers are often deceived as to the true nature and  cost of calls to those numbers. Few consumers realise that the numbers are revenue sharing. No significant competition exists, or is possible by the very nature and structure of  084x, 087x and 070 numbers; telecom companies push the use of the numbers as they can make hidden profits from their use.

Price transparency would exist if all revenue sharing number, without exception, had to be located within a suitable sub-range of “09".  The “09" range can hold 1,000 million number combination. The sub-ranges could be prices from 1p to 150p/minute. A three second price announcement, would be ideal.

If Ofcom does approve deregulation of prices, ( it usually does what it likes, notwithstanding the results of consultations) then it should, in a short time scale, put forward measures to implement true price transparency and competition in revenue sharing numbers.  Ofcom should also seek undertakings from BT that they will put in place measures that aid true price transparency and not make misleading statements to help organisations deceive consumers as to the true nature and cost of calls to 087x and 084x numbers.

Ofcom’s chosen option is based on assurances from BT, but before reliance can be place upon those assurances, Ofcom should ask itself if BT can be trusted to act in the spirit and the letter of any arrangement. All BT’s domestic customers are placed on either Option 1, 2 or 3 - Option 1 is the default option.   Local and National calls cost the same for 99.9% of customers.  BT retain the almost fictional destination between local and national call costs, and calls it “the standard call tariff”. Only the comparative small number of customers on BT’s special “low user scheme” pay the so called standard rate.

We have the undesirable situation in which BT’s “standard tariff” is not the standard tariff at all, and for all practical purposes all 01/02 calls coast 3p/min or less. The existence of the largely fictional “standard tariff”,  which makes a distinction between local and national calls, allows organisations to claim that “0845 is only a local rate call”.  When I recently complained about the call cost of my local HSBC branch converting to “0845", it required quite a complex letter of complaint. In reply, HSBC was able to say that “0845" was a “local rate call” and implied that they were doing me a favour in changing from a geographical number to “0845".  The same is true for the pernicious “0844" numbers which telecom companies are increasingly persuading organisations to use, under the guise of “it’s only a local call” or is generally perceived as such.  It is ironic, that it cost me 400% more to telephone my local HSBC branch on 0845, located 15 minutes away, than to address my enquiry to the New York branch of HSBC.

It is scandalous and indefeasible that a designated category exists (09) for the use of “above normal cost” telephone calls, but is sidestepped by the use of clandestine revenue sharing in other number ranges, especially 087x and 084x..

Ofcom should not accept BT’s assurances until BT behaves in an open and honest way.   This could start with BT making an unequivocal statement that all UK calls (01/02) from landline cost the same, regardless of location, and that the distinction between “local” and “national” rate calls has been abolished.  This statement, conspicuously repeated on all bills and web sites, until it is firmly lodged, could even make BT more money, from an increased use of the telephone by consumers calling distant parts of the UK.

kk wrote on May 28^th, 2006 at 10:30am:

Ofcom’s chosen option is based on assurances from BT, but before reliance can be place upon those assurances, Ofcom should ask itself if BT can be trusted to act in the spirit and the letter of any arrangement.

kk, I don't know about you but whatever assurances BT have made to Ofcom they are keeping between themselves and that I don't like.  What assurances do us consumers have that the assurances that BT have given to Ofcom are not something like, "we wont increase our linerental more than £3", and ofcom have agreed to this.

I for one am not going to take Ofcom's word that their so-called assurances they have from BT are in-keeping with what's best for us consumers - it can easily be favoured in BT's favour than ours.

There has been no evidence to date that supports Ofcom's theory that competition will keep BT's prices down.  In fact, everything BT have done has only increased prices and the other so-called competition have just followed suite with BT and increased their prices in-line with BT's (in most cases) or ever-so-slightly cheaper.  Again, from what I can see, there is no sign that competition alone will keep BT from increasing their prices.

I personally will not be choosing option 4, more than likely option 2 or 3 but I haven't made a firm decision as yet.

Ofcom should never have proposed an option without giving us the full facts behind their decision - instead agreeing with BT that commerical confidentiality is more important than allowing us consumers to make a fully-informed decision.  ;D

This all boils down to me losing complete faith in our so-called regulator and what they think is best for us consumers.  So far, Ofcom's policy does appear to be what's best for businesses!

bbb_uk wrote on May 28^th, 2006 at 4:39pm:

... In fact, everything BT have done has only increased prices and the other so-called competition have just followed suite with BT and increased their prices in-line with BT's (in most cases) or ever-so-slightly cheaper. ...

bbb_uk, I understand you have had a cable line in the past. Have there been price rises on cable and what's the most basic package?

Dave wrote on May 29^th, 2006 at 11:14am:

I understand you have had a cable line in the past. Have there been price rises on cable and what's the most basic package?

From what I observed, TW increased their prices to match that of BT's.  

TW most basic recently went up from £10.50 to £11 (following BTs linerental prices increase).  Their call charges were generally the same as BTs except TW have free weekend (obviously geo's only) calls whereas BT have their 5.5p for an hour at weekends.  On the other hand, TW charge 2ppm evenings whereas BT charge 5.5p for an hour.

TW higher-end package costs same as BT's (always has done from what I remember) but TW have recently introduced a 60min call length before the call becomes chargable (ie same as BT).

TW have always been more expensive on their calls than BT because with TW you have a 6p connection fee as well as the ppm, whereas BT have a minimum call charge (ie without the 6p connection fee).  This was even for geo calls.  NGN calls are more expensive but that, to a certain degree, is beyond their (TW) control due to how NGNs work.

TW used to charge £1 for a calling features which has increased to £1.50.  I believe its the calling features that are actually only thing cheaper than BT but that assumes you don't make use of BT's slight discount for several calling features.  TW, like all other teleco's, charge for CLI.

TW has a phone-comparison page here that used to state the differences (very minor - ie unlimited call length and not 60mins like BTs) between them and BT but looking at the page now, it doesn't mention BT at all and basically just gives a summary of their calling packages.

Has anyone actually looked at how the questions are worded?


Quote:

1. Do you think that there are other forms of regulation that we should consider? 2. Do you agree with our conclusion, and the assessment on which that conclusion is based?

Now is it just me or is is that not one of those questions asks which of the four options you think is better?

The first question asks if there are other forms of regulation apart from those mentioned (I assume) and the second question do you agree with Ofcoms preferred option 4.

Don't Ofcom make you laugh?

bbb_uk wrote on May 29^th, 2006 at 6:13pm:

Now is it just me or is is that not one of those questions asks which of the four options you think is better?

Good point, bbb_uk.  I think if you re-read this consultation using invisible ink reader you get the following question...

Quote:

2. Do you agree with our conclusion, and the assessment on which that conclusion is based ?  (You may comment on any or all of the four options but don't go thinking we're take the slightest bit of notice because this decision has already been made!)

;)  ;) ;)  ;) ;)  (Sorry, couldn't resist that)

Seriously, though, could anyone give me some guidance on the first question asking if other forms of regulation should be considered ?  

Could I also ask, are the following covered by the Retail Price Controls:


Quote:

10. Introduction of call return fee of 6p for pressing 3 after 1471 11. Introduction of call return fee of 7.5p for pressing 0 after 1571

If not, then surely they should be!  Whilst the consultation document flatters BT with its reducing revenues per call minute, it makes no mention of the above price increases (not to mention most of the others raised by bbb_uk above).

Some of my thoughts on this:

• How and why define 'vulnerable' groups? Is this because big business isn't interested in low users? The Light User Scheme is for people who use the telephone very little. What about people who just have a line, make few calls, but use the internet and/or a mobile? The basic line rental is now 50% more than it used to be two years ago! So why not just prevent BT from increasing its basic line rental package (currently BT Together Option 1) even more. After all, it wouldn't put it up even more, would it?!? ::)
  
• Competition appears to be diminishing as the likes of Talk Talk take over Onetel and Tele2. Similarly, did we not start off with many (local?) cable companies; and, following the merger, now we have one: NTL Telewest.
  
• Only BT must allow connections to prefix code call providers such as 1899. How is this free competition? If we are going to have a (supposedly) level playing field with regards line rental, then how come we don't have one with regards this? If all providers allowed access to them, then more people may look at moving.
  
• 
  Quote:

  2.12 The RPC also includes a specific requirement on BT to ensure that its average retention on calls to mobiles to a given mobile operator across all charging periods within a twenty-four hour period is within five per cent of its retention to any other mobile operator. Given that this provision is not a stand-alone requirement, but rather part of the overall RPC (BT's retention on calls to mobiles in general falls within the basket of services currently covered by the RPC), it will also expire on 31 July 2006.

  
  What does this mean and what will this mean for mobile charges?
  
• Is it possible to have broadband from any supplier when taking line rental from BT Wholesale provided lines such as Post Office? Is this at the discretion of the telco?

A couple more points:

• Apparently BT's line rental has traditionally made a loss that was made up by higher priced calls. Should it really cost £11 a month for a basic telephone line?
  
• In answer to question 1 about other regulation that Ofcom should consider I said that all providers should allow connections to access codes like 1899. It leaves a somewhat uneven playing field, and the cheapest is often to go with different suppliers for different calls. Using a BT Wholesale supplier, LLU telco or cable leaves the subscriber with less choice.
  
• Ofcom has done research that shows that most people are aware that they have a choice of different suppliers. With some not allowing access codes to be called, what's the point of them?

I said something similar in my response.  For us consumers to get the best deal for each type of call then we have to use more than one teleco but can only do this using BT and BT are aware of this so what incentive have BT got to keep linerental as it is?  None.  This was proven with the latest linerental increase which only applied to Option 1 customers and as I mentioned earlier, competition doesn't appear to be working otherwise BT's main competitors wouldn't have increased their linerental to match BTs - just where is the competition in that?

The Ofcom document suggested that keeping BT's basic package price regulated would stifle 'innovation'.


Quote:

4.29 Ofcom recognises that there would be a risk of leaving some user groups exposed in the event that a control was imposed solely on access prices, and a safeguard cap on both access and calls would alleviate this. However, there is a balance to be struck as to the appropriate level of regulation. A disproportionate approach may stifle innovation and may result in BT offering discounts only to high users on non-regulated tariff packages, while maintaining current prices of regulated services. This would not necessarily protect those consumers on whom Ofcom’s concerns are focussed. Ofcom considers that a control on access and calls in this way would be disproportionate in a similar way to rolling over the existing price controls.

But a basic telephone line is the starting point for a telephone service. How can BT use 'innovation' to improve such a basic service? The fact is that things like caller display should be included at no extra cost. To charge for such a service in this day and age is daylight robbery.

This word 'innovation' is a load of nonsense. It is 'innovation' that has created BT Together packages, and a weak regulator that allowed BT to remove BT Standard making it the basic (new standard) package.

Responses have been published online here.  ;)

I liked the UKCTA response and from it I quote:-


Quote:

We find it quite bizarre that Ofcom on the one hand proposes to lift the price controls but on the other hand, believes that it is necessary to extract undertakings from BT to ensure that the incumbent does not raise its line rental price and passes through cuts in mobile termination rates. The fact that these undertakings are thought to be necessary must surely be a clear indicator, if not the clearest, that it is actually too early to lift the price controls in the first place.

and the Citizens Advice Bureau and from it I quote:-


Quote:

We therefore welcome the voluntary assurances gained from BT that provide additional protection for such low spending consumers. However, since the precise details of such assurances are not publicly available it is difficult to give a definitive view as to whether they will be sufficient to ensure that such customers are adequately protected.

The majority of responses indicated they did agree with removing regulation controls but didn't feel the time is right stating that BT still have enough SMP to increase line rental (this appeared to be the main concern) and obviously without knowing the so-called "assurances" BT had given Ofcom, they were not prepared to support Ofcom's recommended option 4 without clear controls of somekind in place to protect consumers.

I especially liked what UKCTA had to say (highlighted) which if I'd thought about it, I would have mentioned also.  It is clear that Ofcom does have some concerns otherwise it wouldn't even have to consider getting these secreative "assurances" from BT!

At the beginning of BT’s response to the Ofcom consultation is an invitation to comment.  Comments are to be send to Neena.Rupani@BT.com

This gives an opportunity to send any comments to BT direct, an opportunity not to be missed.

I suppose the deregulation of BT’s prices falls into three areas:

Line rental
Cost of 01/02 calls
Cost of 084x, 087x, 070 and 09

Well as posted in another thread and mentioned by some forum members like Orsankart, Ofcom have announced their decision on BT's regulatory controls.

See Ofcom's full response here.

I don't suppose it took any notice of comments made by members of the general public who responded to the consultation?

Yes NGM  -  Ofcom,  have ignored most of the responses and cite the few responses that support Ofcom’s position.

Quote  .....

“Consultation responses and Ofcom’s decision.

1.15 A range of responses was received to the March Consultation. Ofcom has considered and analysed them in light of its statutory duties. Many of the responses, including those from BT, the Scottish Executive, the Welsh Assembly Government and the Communication Workers Union provide support for Ofcom’s proposal.”

....   End quote

Many ? ?

Oh well at least I didn't waste any more of my time responding to it then.

I used to take Ofcom's consultations seriously foolishly thinking that if enough people expressed strongly minded views that Ofcom would have to change their mind.  However once I realised that Ofcom was a Stalinist organisation that only goes through the motions of consulting while continuing only to implement the favoured plans of its political masters I began to realise that the only purpose of responding was for there to be a public accessible record of one's own views to other respondents to the consultation.

Ofcom is a New Labour Body of the very worst kind.    See http://www.newlabourscandals.co.uk/bodies.htm

It is becoming obvious that all Ofcom’s consultations (and Ofcom itself), which cost a considerable amount, are a waste of taxpayers money.  A complain should be made to the Audit Commission.

It is interesting to note that the Welsh and Scottish governments can have a say, but unfortunately England does not have the same voice.

kk wrote on Jul 20^th, 2006 at 7:57am:

It is becoming obvious that all Ofcom’s consultations (and Ofcom itself), which cost a considerable amount, are a waste of taxpayers money.  A complain should be made to the Audit Commission.

And/or the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. (Parliamentary Ombudsman)

Things may perhaps improve a little once Mr Stephen Carter is sent packing (or according to him leaves voluntarily) shortly.

wrote on Jul 20^th, 2006 at 8:21am:

Things may perhaps improve a little once Mr Stephen Carter is sent packing (or according to him leaves voluntarily) shortly.

paid off? (presumably with full pension contributions...)

Tanllan wrote on Jul 20^th, 2006 at 9:52am:

paid off? (presumably with full pension contributions...)

When it comes to Ofcom staff the words Feather and Bed always seem to be inextricably linked ;)

Hey there guys,
                  I work for BT and was given this forum address by one of the mods when he rang BT a few days ago.

Anyway, having seen the prices that we are launching for the de-regulation you dont need to worry. They are certainly NOT going up, however due to non disclosure agreements I cannot share what these new prices are. But belive me, its better than most companies are doing. :)

Hi darkstar,

Thanks for the information.

I do hope it is good news from BT.  It will be interesting to see how BT  price 0870, 0871, 0845, 0844 and 070.

darkstar wrote on Jul 21^st, 2006 at 7:23am:

They are certainly NOT going up, however due to non disclosure agreements I cannot share what these new prices are. But belive me, its better than most companies are doing. :)

I think we know BT phone call prices will not be going up (how could they given how ridiculously high some of BT's prices such as EU mobile calls are) but what most of us are concerned about is the cost of the BT line rental.

On 30th June 2004 BT Standard line rental was £28.50 and customers got a £6.33 calling allowance with this taking the real cost of line rental to £22.17 per quarter.  But now line rental is £33 per quarter (with no calling allowance) a 50% increase.  This is because even those of us who never make any calls with BT are all forced to pay for something called BT Option One (which is supposedly a BT customer call discount package) just to go on keeping our BT line switched on and connected to broadband.  Although there is something called Wholesale Line Rental this is a sad joke as the price BT charges to its competitors is almost as much as that it charges its own retail customers.  As a result other companies like TalkTalk and the PostOffice cannot make a profit from line rental alone so their line rental is little cheaper than BT's and they all have more expensive 084/7 call prices.

As to BT's call prices I don't think they should be allowed to lower them too far as they still have far too much of the uk calls marketplace and their ought to be continuing pressure for customers to move their business to other companies.  Also if I were BT with a remaining customer base of people like my sister, who wrongly imagine their phone might stop working if they moved to another company, I wouldn't lower the call prices much further because most of my remaining customers would be the kind who would not leave BT under almost any circumstances.  Therefore lowering call prices too much further would only be damaging BT's profitability.  I doubt BT are going to start doing calls at only 3p fixed in the weekday daytime - no matter how long they are for instance?

I wonder who in the forum spoke to you the other day?   I had a call with a very senior BT person on its NGN call pricing the other day, although I don't specifically remember mentioning this website to that person.  However perhaps one of your colleagues pointed out that I was one of the main activists on www.saynoto0870.com?

Notice how Ofcom is removing this piece of regulation immediately but will only start to do anything about 0870 until next year.  ::)

I should hope that BT's prices will not rise any more, especially as they went up [supposedly] to allow others to compete. What a joke; they just followed by raising their prices!

From NTL's Customerupdate

Quote:

We are changing our 3-2-1 Standard line rental price from £10.50 to £11 a month, bringing us in line with our key competitors. ...

Notice how NTL uses the word 'changing' instead of 'increasing', in an effort to make it sound not as bad as it really is.

Dave wrote on Jul 21^st, 2006 at 12:41pm:

Notice how Ofcom is removing this piece of regulation immediately but will only start to do anything about 0870 until next year.  ::)

Surely you mean not until 2008 Dave? ::)  And not for 0845 until 2010 if at all even though I don't suppose there will be any 0845 dialup customers left in 2010. :o >:(

wrote on Jul 21^st, 2006 at 3:59pm:

Surely you mean not until 2008 Dave? ::)

I thought that the outcome was that companies were given [another] year to rip off customers before making 0870 charged at geographical rates?!  :-?


Quote:

...And not for 0845 until 2010 if at all even though I don't suppose there will be any 0845 dialup customers left in 2010. :o >:(

I have pay as you go dial-up accounts with (as was) Freeserve and BT Internet. Up until a few months ago both were on 0845 numbers, which they had used for years. Now they have been replaced by 0844 numbers...

I'm thinking about creating a timeline that can be kept up to date with all this sort of stuff on. It would be especially useful to any journalists out there. It could have events like the following on it:

• Removal of BT Standard
  
• Consultations on NTS and this one, amongst others
  
• Price changes for telephone packages (not just BT's). So NTL's price rise that it shamefully says is to bring it "in line" with its "key competitors" (see here) could go on there.
  
• Introducation of BT Privacy making caller display free that was closely followed by a 50p increase for everyone.
  
• Other micro increases like charging for calling number back on 1471 by dialling 3 and speaking clock.

Removal of BT Standard (forced migration to BT Together Option 1) - 1st July 2004

Introducation of BT Privacy making caller display free - 1st July 2005

Dave wrote on Jul 21^st, 2006 at 4:27pm:

I thought that the outcome was that companies were given [another] year to rip off customers before making 0870 charged at geographical rates?!  :-?

Its not like you to be so easily hoodwinked Dave.  After all I think we all originally hoped for the changes to only take place one year after the Ofcom consultation document published in December 2004? ;)  Or perhaps even the OFTEL consulation document that closed in December 2003. ;) ::)

I quote from PP 51 and 52 of Ofcom's NTS:A Way Forward Statement  published on 19th April 2006 - www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/nts_forward/statement/statement.pdf

Para 4.136 "Ofcom acccepts that some SPs may require more than 12 months lead time, to plan for the move to a new number range.  One of the benefits of allowing more time is that it will reduce the costs associated with number migration"

Para 4.139 "In the light of the above Ofcom has concluded that the proposed changes for 0870 calls (i.e resoration of the geographic link and removal of 0870 calls from the scope of the NTS condition) should be implemented 18th months after the publication date of the Numbering Review Statement.  On current plans, this means that the changes will come into effect in January 2008

Note the "on current plans" as we all know about Ofcom slippage!.  So one can imagine that 2008 could even easily become late 2008 or start of 2009! :o :'(

wrote on Jul 21^st, 2006 at 10:46am:

darkstar wrote on Jul 21st, 2006 at 7:23am: They are certainly NOT going up, however due to non disclosure agreements I cannot share what these new prices are. But belive me, its better than most companies are doing. :) I think we know BT phone call prices will not be going up (how could they given how ridiculously high some of BT's prices such as EU mobile calls are) but what most of us are concerned about is the cost of the BT line rental. As to BT's call prices I don't think they should be allowed to lower them too far as they still have far too much of the uk calls marketplace and their ought to be continuing pressure for customers to move their business to other companies. I wonder who in the forum spoke to you the other day?   I had a call with a very senior BT person on its NGN call pricing the other day, although I don't specifically remember mentioning this website to that person.  However perhaps one of your colleagues pointed out that I was one of the main activists on www.saynoto0870.com?

Just to go over some of these points:

the basic line rental will NOT be going up, that I garuntee (unless I have been lied to). WLR companies are charged the SAME as BT Retail as we have to buy it from BT Wholesale the same as companies liek talk talk. That is monitered by Ofcom (or so we are told in training).

Anyway, I dont see what teh problem is with Bt being able to lower prices given that people ahve no reason to stay with Bt when they can currently get much cheaper offers from other people. We need to be able to compete fairly and on equal footing, something that isnt happening right now. The reputation we have built up is a fair one as we have HAD to build that up as we couldnt have a reputation for being cheap. :P

Oh as for the BTT Option 1, remember that actually runs at a loss to BT!


Im certainly not a higher up in BT, in fact I am a phone monkey. :P But i work in the Customer Options Team, so i get to compare prices across the marketplace. the guy i spoke to went out of his way to mention thsi site. :) And Im VERY glad he did as I also want to save money.

darkstar wrote on Jul 21^st, 2006 at 10:57pm:

I dont see what teh problem is with Bt being able to lower prices given that people ahve no reason to stay with Bt when they can currently get much cheaper offers from other people. We need to be able to compete fairly and on equal footing, something that isnt happening right now.

I personally don't have a problem with BT being able to compete fairly my only concern is that they have the power now to raise prices as they still have significant market power (SMP).

If BT want to compete with others then why is that the following price rises have happenend - much of which weren't so long ago:-

1.   Line rental on BT Together Option 1 from £10.50 to £11.00 per month
2.   Extension of daytime rate to start at 6am instead of 8am
3.   Minimum call charge from 5p to 5.5p (6p for business)
4.   Evening/weekend rate after 1 hour from 1p to 3p per minute
5.   Call charge to Speaking Clock 123 from 20p to 30p
6.   Minimum call charge on public payphones from 20p to 30p
7.   Introduction of £5 late payment charge
8.   Call charge to directory enquiries 118500 from 15p to 23p per minute plus 40p connection charge
9.   Ring back charge from 10p to 15p per use - chargeable even if not connected after 45 minutes trying
10. Introduction of call return fee of 6p for pressing 3 after 1471
11. Introduction of call return fee of 7.5p for pressing 0 after 1571
12. New installation connection fee increased from £75 to £125

Now if BT want to be competitive then why introduce all these increases?  I realise they couldn't lower these prices but why not keep some prices the same?  What is happening is that when BT increase their prices the others just follow and do the same - this is confirmed with the linerental increase where TalkTalk, Telewest/NTL, etc have just followed by example.  Where is the competition here?

For us to use the cheapest possible provider and allow us to use multiple suppliers we need to keep our linerental with BT.  BT are fully aware of this and this is why they increased the linerental for those on Option 1 (their now basic lowest tier package) but those on Option 2 or 3, the linerental stayed the same?

Another example is the extension of the daytime rate and minimum call rates, etc - most other competitors (the main ones specifically) just increased theirs as well!  Again, where is the competition?

Most responses to this consultation expressed concern over the promises that BT had given to Ofcom about certain things - they were concerned about why it has been kept a secret, etc?  Most also expressed concern over lack of "real" competition!

I use the term "real" competition like that that exists for tariffs offered by the mobile networks.  These mobile tariffs (inclusive mins/txts) and other general things like free weekend calls to landline and any UK mobile, etc are competitive as evidence proves that when one network introduces things like free weekend calls, money back for topping up your PAYG phone then others have followed suite.

I realise that competition doesn't exist for prices to NGN's and these so-called free mins/offers, etc are subject to some other t&c but this is normal practice as in this country we very, very rarely get anything for free without some kind of t&c attached to it.

In fact all responses except those few mentioned by Ofcom were not in favour (or fully support) Ofcom's recommended option but yet, as usual, Ofcom ignored all these and went with their recommended option.

This is bad on its own but Ofcom went one further in their consultation outcome by making it sound that most responses were in favour of their recommended option but this is clearly misleading if you read the actual responses!

1.   Line rental on BT Together Option 1 from £10.50 to £11.00 per month: £11 is STILL operating at a loss, we are trying to drag back some of the money we are losing on this package. Basic laws of economics surely? If I ran a buisness I wouldnt want to sell by products at a loss....

2.   Extension of daytime rate to start at 6am instead of 8am: Personally I find the 12 hour days are easier for people to grasp. Other than that I cant comment.

3.   Minimum call charge from 5p to 5.5p (6p for business): again, welcome to inflation. BT has to pay people more (for example) and so has to find that money from somewhere. Or did you think they could charge the same price forever?

4.   Evening/weekend rate after 1 hour from 1p to 3p per minute: Seriously....such a petty point! How many people talk for that long without hanging up and re-dialling? We even tell them that when they go onto the packages.

5.   Call charge to Speaking Clock 123 from 20p to 30p: I dont know.

6.   Minimum call charge on public payphones from 20p to 30p: maybe that 20p wasnt enough to cover the cost of the upkeep?

7.   Introduction of £5 late payment charge: Well if people payed their bills it wouldnt be a problem. ;) But seriously, it costs just under that to follow up on 80% of the peopel who dont pay on time.

8.   Call charge to directory enquiries 118500 from 15p to 23p per minute plus 40p connection charge: this again I dont know.

9.   Ring back charge from 10p to 15p per use - chargeable even if not connected after 45 minutes trying: becouse it still costs BT to do this (to counter the chargeable even on no connection). The price increase I again dont know.

10. Introduction of call return fee of 6p for pressing 3 after 1471: I dont know, but I agree this seems like a rip off.

11. Introduction of call return fee of 7.5p for pressing 0 after 1571 : as above

12. New installation connection fee increased from £75 to £125: Yeah, this increase is way over the top for sure. I know Openreach charge BT Retail the cost, so I assume they gave us a price and we added to it in order to cover our costs. But again thats an assumption.


But BT wont up prices given that we are losing customers due to us being more expensive.

darkstar wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2006 at 7:45am:

1.   Line rental on BT Together Option 1 from £10.50 to £11.00 per month: £11 is STILL operating at a loss, we are trying to drag back some of the money we are losing on this package. Basic laws of economics surely? If I ran a buisness I wouldnt want to sell by products at a loss....

If I remember correctly, Ofcom did an investigation into the costs involved for maintaining the copper wiring, etc and it was about £8/£9 (please someone correct me if I'm wrong  ;) ).


Quote:

2.   Extension of daytime rate to start at 6am instead of 8am: Personally I find the 12 hour days are easier for people to grasp. Other than that I cant comment.

That's the same spiel that BT used which is common for companies to use spiel like this to cover the reason for the increase.  "Simplifing prices" is another spiel used to hide the fact that prices are going up.


Quote:

3.   Minimum call charge from 5p to 5.5p (6p for business): again, welcome to inflation. BT has to pay people more (for example) and so has to find that money from somewhere. Or did you think they could charge the same price forever?

BT only have to pay other people for calls that may not end on their own network and given the number of customers on BT this is not likely to be high.  Look at the flip-side where the likes of TalkTalk, Primus, etc can still have lower minimum call charges but yet they pay more because all calls made from their network will end up on other teleco's like BT, Telewest/NTL, etc.


Quote:

4.   Evening/weekend rate after 1 hour from 1p to 3p per minute: Seriously....such a petty point! How many people talk for that long without hanging up and re-dialling? We even tell them that when they go onto the packages.

I agree petty but some women can gab forever including some kids and I can imagine some forgetting to hang-up the phone before the hour as they're too into their conversation to realise the time.  I realise this doesn't happen often but it still happens and it is still a price increase none the less.


Quote:

5.   Call charge to Speaking Clock 123 from 20p to 30p: I dont know.

For obvious reasons - ie to increase their prices


Quote:

6.   Minimum call charge on public payphones from 20p to 30p: maybe that 20p wasnt enough to cover the cost of the upkeep?

I agree the upkeep of payphones maybe expensive but the cost of making calls from them I'm guessing can probably cover this - especially if one makes the mistake of making a call to a 07, 084x/087x, 09x number (the 08x numbers are very common these days).


Quote:

7.   Introduction of £5 late payment charge: Well if people payed their bills it wouldnt be a problem. ;) But seriously, it costs just under that to follow up on 80% of the peopel who dont pay on time.

Some people maybe in financial trouble and have probs paying.  How can it cost £5 to follow up when its done automatically by your computers - the only cost is the paper/ink/envelope and the couple of seconds it takes someone to put it in an envelope.  £5 per account that is overdue based on the above sounds like BT are making money from those that do unfortunately pay late.


Quote:

8.   Call charge to directory enquiries 118500 from 15p to 23p per minute plus 40p connection charge: this again I dont know.

Again obviously to just increase charges and get more money


Quote:

9.   Ring back charge from 10p to 15p per use - chargeable even if not connected after 45 minutes trying: becouse it still costs BT to do this (to counter the chargeable even on no connection). The price increase I again dont know.

I don't think I need to mention why the price increased!


Quote:

10. Introduction of call return fee of 6p for pressing 3 after 1471: I dont know, but I agree this seems like a rip off.

Similar to above


Quote:

11. Introduction of call return fee of 7.5p for pressing 0 after 1571 : as above

As above


Quote:

12. New installation connection fee increased from £75 to £125: Yeah, this increase is way over the top for sure. I know Openreach charge BT Retail the cost, so I assume they gave us a price and we added to it in order to cover our costs. But again thats an assumption.

Although I don't like the increase I can see the reasons for this as I know sending an engineer out would cost BT a lot, including the new wiring required and connection to the local exchange.  As reconnections are currently (for how long now?) free then I can see that that reconnections are subsidised by new connections - maybe?


Quote:

But BT wont up prices given that we are losing customers due to us being more expensive.

Is there anything else they can increase that they haven't already recently done?

As for BT losing customers then I can see this being only small as most people even though they may use another supplier for calls, still pay BT for linerental. So BT may lose some of theirprofits when this happens but if they didn't keep increasing them then it wouldn't be as bad.

The only time BT really lose customers must be those that take linerental and calls from a supplier like TalkTalk.

kk wrote on Jul 21^st, 2006 at 9:43am:

I do hope it is good news from BT.  It will be interesting to see how BT  price 0870, 0871, 0845, 0844 and 070.

Due to revenue sharing, I can't see these getting lower unless its ever so slightly or its subsidised by an increase somewhere else.

I think darkstar is one of those annoying company saps you find in call centres who simply accepts like a sponge any ridiculous excuse the company puts out to justify any of its actions.

Also he claims BT Wholesale and BT Retail are separate operations.  The reality is that there is only BT plc with one share price and that BT Wholesale and BT Retail each have a Director on BT PLC's board.

BT Retail complains they make almost no profit on BT Option 1 because BT Wholesale charges them almost as much as they pay to BT Wholesale but BT Wholesale does very niclely indeed on this hugely expensive line rental charge and it comprises a significant part of BT's total revenues.  For other phone operators like the PostOffice, TalkTalk etc the line rental is just a total loss area on which they make no profit.  That is why unlike BT they cannot afford to offer free Caller Display.  In other forms of business the cost of a wholesale product to business is usually much less than 90% of what it sells the service to the customer for

The only reason BT claims its quarterly line rental needs to be so high is because it ascribes a huge value to its often 20 to 50 year old exchange buildings and trunk cables.  If they were valued realistically on the basis they were nearly life expired then such a high quarterly rental of £33 for phone compared to £5.50 to £11 quarterly standing charge for gas, electricity and water could not be justified.

Price controls should be maintained over BT because they still have so much of the market and so many customers still have a touching faith that big blue BT are nice chaps and treats them well.  If price controls are not maintained BT's share of the uk telecoms marketplace will never fall to below 50% as it needs to do before price controls on them are removed.

wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2006 at 8:30am:

I think darkstar is one of those annoying company saps you find in call centres who simply accepts like a sponge any ridiculous excuse the company puts out to justify any of its actions.

Thats fine, I think you are one of those annoying idiots who assume that a company cant ever do anything right and feels the need to insult anyone who doesnt agree with them or assume that the world is a rip off.  ::)

I have freely agreed that some of the things put forward by BT have been a rip off, Im not stupid enough to think otherwise. But I joined this forum as I assumed that it would have people on it who were concerned with getting a good deal and debating the pros and cons of certain providers (including BT), hell the guy who asked me to join said specificly that he wanted the view of a BT worker in here.

maybe, just maybe you should get your head out of your backside and learn to realise that the economics of the world are NOT based around what little you think you know.


But I thank you for your warm welcome to the forum and I hope that the little information I did debate with was instructive to some of you before idiot man here decided he would be the be all and end all of knowledge.

Oh, and Wholesale and Retail are seperate in that Retail do NOT get any benefits from being part of the BT group. I work from inside the company, I see how the interaction between them goes. I hate the job and am happy to slate them until the cows come home, but at least I can do so without making assumptions that fit only my worldview.

Oh, and if you had bothered to find out anything about me you would find I am a highly intelligent person who is able to discuss a wide range of subjects with ease. I am not easily taken in by anything or anyone. Hell how many of these annoying saps can discuss Commedia Dell Arte with an expert? Or debate the reasons and morals of Hitler and his actions (not that either of those are any use on this forum mind) for example?

Edited fopr my awful spelling. Damn dyslexia. :(

darkstar wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2006 at 9:41am:

wrote on Jul 22nd, 2006 at 8:30am: I think darkstar is one of those annoying company saps you find in call centres who simply accepts like a sponge any ridiculous excuse the company puts out to justify any of its actions. Thats fine, I think you are one of those annoying idiots who assume that a company cant ever do anything right and feels the need to insult anyone who doesnt agree with them or assume that the world is a rip off.  ::) I have freely agreed that some of the things put forward by BT have been a rip off, Im not stupid enough to think otherwise. But I joined this forum as I assumed that it would have people on it who were concerned with getting a good deal and debating the pros and cons of certain providers (including BT), hell the guy who asked me to join said specificly that he wanted the view of a BT worker in here. maybe, just maybe you should get your head out of your backside and learn to realise that the economics of the world are NOT based around what little you think you know. But I thank you for your warm welcome to the forum and I hope that the little information I did debate with was instructive to some of you before idiot man here decided he would be the be all and end all of knowledge. Oh, and Wholesale and Retail are seperate in that Retail do NOT get any benefits from being part of the BT group. I work from inside the company, I see how the interaction between them goes. I hate the job and am happy to slate them until the cows come home, but at least I can do so without making assumptions that fit only my worldview. Oh, and if you had bothered to find out anything about me you would find I am a highly intelligent person who is able to discuss a wide range of subjects with ease. I am not easily taken in by anything or anyone. Hell how many of these annoying saps can discuss Commedia Dell Arte with an expert? Or debate the reasons and morals of Hitler and his actions (not that either of those are any use on this forum mind) for example? Edited fopr my awful spelling. Damn dyslexia. :(

Darkstar - on behalf of other forum members let me apologise for this ill-considered and insulting reply.


~Edited by bbb_uk

Firstly, darkstar, I would like to apologise for the comments about you by NonGeographicalMan.


darkstar wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2006 at 7:45am:

1.   Line rental on BT Together Option 1 from £10.50 to £11.00 per month: £11 is STILL operating at a loss, we are trying to drag back some of the money we are losing on this package. Basic laws of economics surely? If I ran a buisness I wouldnt want to sell by products at a loss....

But the price BT Retail pays is the one BT Wholesale sets. Thus, if BT Wholesale makes a profit and BT Retail does not, then BT as a whole is still profitting. Indeed, its competitors like TalkTalk are put into the same boat as BT Retail, i.e. they pay the same amount for their service and have to compete. So perhaps it's in BT's interest for the profit to be in BT Wholesale rather than BT Retail. The thing is though, putting whether they are making a loss or a profit aside for a moment, these price increases must surely make BT more profitable at the direct expense of Joe Public.

Getting back to the making a loss thing; the other side of the coin is that companies charge far more than it actually costs them for a service. For example, a pair of Nike trainers that retail at £80 don't cost anywhere near that to manufacture. It's the name that's being paid for.

So when services like the call return element of 1471 or caller display are charged at an exorbitant amount, I feel that we are being held to ransom by greedy companies just out for profit.

The competition, we have been told, will reduce prices. But I do not believe that this is what is happening one bit. Granted, inflation is always a factor, but that does not excuse the introduction of charging for elements that were previously free. They also seem to have plenty of money to throw at marketing people to create illusions that prices are being simplified and that they are making such changes after consulting the customer.


Quote:

4.   Evening/weekend rate after 1 hour from 1p to 3p per minute: Seriously....such a petty point! How many people talk for that long without hanging up and re-dialling? We even tell them that when they go onto the packages.

But in BT's effort to "simplify" packages, you can tell them that until the cows come home! The elderly, especially, do not understand that certain calls are not charged according to their length. Trying to explain that you have to redial after an hour means little to my Grandma. Inflating the pence per minute after 1 hour by 300% is an underhand way of profiting after establishing this particular part of the tariff.

Another such example is BT Together, which originally charged all calls on a per minute basis. For the equivalent of £1.80 per month over BT Standard, you could have BT Together rates. Then evening and weekend geographical calls were made 6p for upto 1 hour. So short calls (lasting less than 2 minutes) were actually cheaper in the daytime! Now it became clear as to why BT Answer 1571 and other answering services could be provided for 'free'. With the new BT Together, the inclusive call time was quietly dropped. The marketing people obviously forgot to make a song and dance about the removal of £2.40 worth of inclusive call time that was present in the old BT Together.

I felt that this was a very underhand way of slipping in a price increase for those who used the phone less. And by keeping the name of the package, people would have felt comfortable with it; that prices were being simplified/reduced, when that wasn't necessarily the case. As competition has taken hold, this has set the tone for the types of illusions created by the whole industry.

In a similar fashion, it meant that the terms "peak" and "off-peak" could not be used, as a "peak rate" is, by definition, higher than an "off-peak" rate. Again, how many people have cottoned on to this?

Quote:

6.   Minimum call charge on public payphones from 20p to 30p: maybe that 20p wasnt enough to cover the cost of the upkeep?

I can understand that with the decline in public payphone usage due to mobile phones, that this must go up. It's an unfortunate side effect. However, answering services that kick in when the caller doesn't want to leave a message now costs 30p! See this recent thread where the OP's daughter used up her last change on an answerphone to request a lift late at night. This is obviously a matter of personal safety and the inability to call a number with an answering service on and 'opt-out' of it metering is only what is to be expected.

No profiteering telco will do anything about this, even though it's probably technically possible. I firmly believe that the telecommunications industry in its current state is a blank cheque to any 'enterprising' business person. It should be not for profit or the regulator should enforce some basic moral principles, like the caller should not have to pay for the decision of the receiver to have voicemail on the line. Either way, I do seriously wonder how much better off we all are, and how much we, the citizen-consumers, are actually paying.

Statistics can be made to show whatever one wants them to show. I know that I must now pay £11 per month, when I used to pay £7.35 on BT Standard. That's a 50% increase in two years! It's a case of making it cheaper for higher users so that they use the service more and charging this back to the lower users. I think of it like squashing a balloon, where BT only ever talks about the squashed end.


Quote:

12. New installation connection fee increased from £75 to £125: Yeah, this increase is way over the top for sure. I know Openreach charge BT Retail the cost, so I assume they gave us a price and we added to it in order to cover our costs. But again thats an assumption.

I think that that's a fair price. There has been much discussion on MSE about this, as people have found that with new properties, someone must pay the installation fee. For the work that is involved, some installations will cost more, some less, I think that £125 is reasonable. Whether new estates where the builders have laid all cables require such a fee is another issue.


Quote:

But BT wont up prices given that we are losing customers due to us being more expensive.

This brings me on to another point. Surely it is accepted that BT will, on aggregate, loose customers. Expecting that that will not be the case is tantamount to saying that it should keep its significant market power (SMP). Equally so, the fact that it had a monopoly is nothing to do with the fact that it is 'all conquering'. It was a public utility, and as such it operates the majority of the telephone network.

As for BT being "more expensive", I that is subjective. For someone who wants caller display, a pretty basic service in today's world, they would have to pay even more to other providers. NTL even boasted that it was raising its line rental to bring it "in line" with its competitors. So it could obviously make ends meet at its old price but increased it just to make that bit extra profit. Hence I refer back to my example with the 'name brand' trainers. Why should I have to pay £x for a service I know costs less than this? With the trainers I have a choice, with telecommunications the choice aspect is a load of nonsense!

bbb_uk wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2006 at 8:12am:

darkstar wrote on Jul 22nd, 2006 at 7:45am: 1.   Line rental on BT Together Option 1 from £10.50 to £11.00 per month: £11 is STILL operating at a loss, we are trying to drag back some of the money we are losing on this package. Basic laws of economics surely? If I ran a buisness I wouldnt want to sell by products at a loss.... If I remember correctly, Ofcom did an investigation into the costs involved for maintaining the copper wiring, etc and it was about £8/£9 (please someone correct me if I'm wrong  ;) ). Quote: 3.   Minimum call charge from 5p to 5.5p (6p for business): again, welcome to inflation. BT has to pay people more (for example) and so has to find that money from somewhere. Or did you think they could charge the same price forever? BT only have to pay other people for calls that may not end on their own network and given the number of customers on BT this is not likely to be high.  Look at the flip-side where the likes of TalkTalk, Primus, etc can still have lower minimum call charges but yet they pay more because all calls made from their network will end up on other teleco's like BT, Telewest/NTL, etc. [quote]7.   Introduction of £5 late payment charge: Well if people payed their bills it wouldnt be a problem. ;) But seriously, it costs just under that to follow up on 80% of the peopel who dont pay on time.

Some people maybe in financial trouble and have probs paying.  How can it cost £5 to follow up when its done automatically by your computers - the only cost is the paper/ink/envelope and the couple of seconds it takes someone to put it in an envelope.  £5 per account that is overdue based on the above sounds like BT are making money from those that do unfortunately pay late.
[/quote]

Anyway, I wanted to answer these points:

1) I am including the things that Bt (and any OLO) would have to take into account such as paying for its electricity, building ground rent, wages on staff, ect ect ect. Its all taken into account and for the basic line (if you use a CPS for example) this just doesnt cover those costs.

3) again I meant staff pay rises, they go up quicker than the BT prices. You can belive THAT (we have a pretty good union). ;)

7) Its not entirely automated, and many of these situations cost BT a fair wack to sort out as people ring up to sort out payment plans for late payers ect.


bbb_uk, no problem and thanks. I really shouldnt ahve responded, but Ive been a bad tempered SOB as of late. :)