The best of 'Reader Comments': unbundling the local loop and dot-com advertising

Each week silicon.com is inundated with comments from you, our readers. From the past seven days, here we look at the argument surrounding the unbundling of the local loop. There's also a reaction to our analysis about stunted dot-com ad spend.

Telecoms watchdog Oftel met with various telcos at the end of last week to ask why they haven't taken up residency in BT exchanges to offer DSL services. The rural nature of these first exchanges to be opened was blamed (http://www.silicon.com/a42101 ) --Why penalise rural areas?
From: Chris Hill I can't get ADSL at home - not only is my exchange not in the list for ADSL, but I live more than 3.5km from my sub-exchange. I can't get ISDN or Home Highway either. Some mornings I can't get above 28K even. I can't get to work on time by public transport and I can't work from home. Oftel should be pushing BT to supply high-speed connections where they are needed, not pandering to the urban masses. We all get PSTN at the same rate no matter where we are in the country - it used to be called a public service. Data connectivity should be treated the same. --Crippling the e-economy?
From: Graham Kellen If there is one factor that is causing the UK to struggle with embracing the E-culture it is the lack of access and bandwidth, this has the effect of limiting design and functionality and user base. This is ultimately due to the stranglehold BT has on communications. We all moan about Microsoft, but the real damage is being done by BT driven by their greed. --Local loopy
From: Anon. The whole process of LLU [local loop unbundling] and access has been undermined by Oftel themselves, who have appeared to be little more than a department of BT and have never challenged BT on reasons for extended lead times into sites. Furthermore BT have been proactive in exploiting the regulator's lack of teeth. No wonder so many of the original 27 OLO have pulled out and we now face the reality that there will be very little competition in this market. --Oftel and BT killing net access
From: Anon. Suddenly 'space isn't a problem'. One more lame excuse from BT exposed. The truth? They don't want, for instance, DSL since they're making a mint from expensive metered services like ISDN. If they're forced into DSL they want to make it as unattractive as possible, so people won't switch to it (remember their plans to introduce a METERED version?). If they HAVE to implement it at all, then they're going to ensure that they have a monopoly by blocking other providers with spurious excuses, or by making access so expensive and difficult that their competitors will remove themselves from the market. And Oftel has shown nothing but a willingness to roll over and let them get away with it. Thank goodness my company has now largely disposed of their services. --Stock low
From: Dave Kidd With telco share prices falling almost daily is it surprising that they don't want to pour capital into developing their own local loop? --Build your own loop!
From: Philip Bennellick If I wanted to start a supermarket chain to rival Tesco or Asda, I would be expected to build my own shop. I couldn't expect one of the established chains to let me into a corner, and I don't think that BT should be forced to let others in. Start your own business by all means, but start small with your own property and grow to become a rival. -- It's not like that...
From: Frank Smith Would this not be the same as train companies building their own track next to current ones!
BT should be forced to open its local loop and allow true competition. Redstone will be forced to cover the build out costs while BT will be able to cut theirs. And although this news hogged the headlines, here are another two pieces of feedback worth a second look. They refer to an analysis about the advertising quandary many dot-coms are facing (http://www.silicon.com/a42200 ), and just how we get people - in the right numbers - interested in careers in IT (http://www.silicon.com/a42145 ). -- Online ads - the real problem
From: Kevin Rice Your article implies that advertising dependent dot-coms are in trouble because they depend on other similar dot-coms for advertising revenue. Surely that is symptomatic of the real problem i.e. the online advertising industry has failed to attract the advertising masses. According to AdRelevance.com it remains true that [in the US] 80 per cent of online advertising revenues can be traced to just 80 advertisers. Would the same be true for traditional media such as print? No, you could find 80 advertisers in just one magazine. The existing online advertising industry is led by businesses and business models that strongly favour big spenders and big audiences. The sales model emulates that of broadcast media such as TV, but online advertising should be about targeting and direct response, not just branding. The web has enormous diversity of content and to match advertisers to content there must also be an enormous diversity of advertisers. But there isn't. This is the real problem. It's a straight 'supply and demand' imbalance. If more advertisers had easy, cost-effective access to online advertising, making websites truly competitive with offline publications, then the advertising dependent dot-coms would not be starving to death. -- The cultural representation of techies
From: Haydn Rees Drama has a part to play here in the rehabilitating of IT people. The fat kid in 'The Simpsons' is the only character I have ever seen on TV opening an envelope with his vocational prediction praying to become a Systems Analyst. More heroically framed, brilliant, interesting, dot-com millionaires in popular soaps please.