Forum Topic

Happy to admit economics is not my speciality. I would agree Royal Mail and BT Group aren't monopolies by they dominate in their market place. (I'm not sure the RM does in the parcels market but I'm sure it does in the diminishing letter one which other providers are allowed to feed into?)  However, although BT doesn't dominate in the more recent mobile networks many other networks use it's core networks (and, to some extent, BT there's) and more connections to homes are provided by BT OpenReach. There are some new FTTP startup, for example, City Fibre, and of course Virgin cable in some areas, but I think OpenReach still dominates? (Happy to be shown stats proving otherwise, but I wouldn't mind getting City Fibre put some long distance traffic over BT's circuits?) I'd say some companies have found it difficult to compete with BT; what happened to Energis telecoms, and aren't easyJet now an ISP rather than a business network provider? I'd accept as we move from PSTN to VoIP telephony BT will become less dominant in the retail market but I suspect it will remain the main provider of connectivity for the foreseeable future? I'd say that the government does still consider telecoms, and BT as the dominant supplier, if strategic value; I seem to remember it was told not to use Chinese equipment? The government is certainly concerned about what people are doing on the end of those lines https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/british-govt-is-scanning-all-internet-devices-hosted-in-uk/

Michael Ixer ● 952d

Ed, my concern would not be with Cellnet/O2 or IAG - both the mobile phone markets and airline industry have multiple companies providing competition: IAG is a holding company formed to engineer the merger of British Airways and Iberia Airlines and its stocks are traded on the London and Madrid markets, and, if my memory serves me correctly, O2 was created after BT was privatised so wasn't part of the original organisation, plus BT has now absorbed the EE mobile phone operation. I think the area of concern is where competition isn't possible - either because it isn't practicable, such as electricity, gas and water distribution, or it's limited because of the existing extensive infrastructure of the previously state organisation that makes it difficult for new competitors to build a competing one, such as BT's core trunk network or it's premises connections managed by OpenReach, and the Royal Mail's national distribution and home delivery services. Those are ones that need to be protected by strong regulation to prevent transfer of control abroad, which does seem to have happened in the case of some energy and water companies.You're correct, the UK never set up a sovereign fund in the same way Norway did. If I remember correctly in the early days of the UK oil industry (circa mid 70s) the then Labour government set up the British National Oil Corporation which was both an operator (for example, of the Thistle field) and a regulator of other operators (for example, of Mobil
in the Beryl field) and that would have been the basis for creating a UK sovereign fund. My understanding was that the Thatcher government elected in 1979 abandoned that idea, but that is stretching my memory!

Michael Ixer ● 952d

Ed. I'm not defending the privatisations of the Thatcher government or the way in which they were done. Most - energy, rail, water, mail - don't seem to have worked in the consumer's interest, from what I remember it was driven by political dogma? I think the TSB sort of worked, didn't it? (Was there some dispute over who owned it, as with the Tote?) I believe the BT one has worked quite well but that was mainly because it coincided with a number of telecommunications, networking and IT developments as well as coinciding with/following (?) AT&T deregulation in the US. It certainly improved lead times for circuits and services - unless they had to dig up the road to install a new circuit! The main issue has been the conflict between OpenReach "last mile" provision for both BT services versus other Telcos?It's not impossible BT could run into difficulties: I think they're desperate to ditch PSTN in favour of VoIP phone services as there's no money in running it and the infrastructure that supports it. But they're lucky, because they're under pressure to rollout fibre to the premises for everyone and PSTN doesn't work on that, and from a planning perspective it make sense swap to VoIP in advance of fibre coming along.However, as I understand it, the Royal Mail letters have lost money for ages, and it's parcels and premium tracked services that have kept it afloat (I was told serveral decades ago the GPO used phone services to subsidise postal service). I'm prepared to be corrected on those as I'm not sure.Yes, pensions are a minefield, which is why many organisations are limiting their liability by swapping to money purchase schemes and putting the risk on employees.

Michael Ixer ● 960d

nope......not even area managers do thatThe letter business has been dropping for decades, so why did people buy into a business sold off when that was happening if it was inevitable it would happen. They had no plan for the future. You have to ask yourself also why the Board have year on year, awarded themselves above inflation pay rises, huge bonuses etc while the business has continued to decline. Can anyone explaining that logic to me? And on top of that this year, also awarding themselves 100's of 1000's of shares in the company. How can the people at the top reward themself this highly when they are failing to turn the business upwards? I would also like to point out that they keep comparing this years profit (loss) to last year.....to justify the changes they want to make to terms and conditions. How can you compare the profits of a parcel business to the previous 2 years under Covid? Its obvious even to the people at the bottom that those profits would be short lived...they are doing this to justify what they are doing. And the government investigation is all down to them wanting to split the company, take the parcels and give the letters (the unprofitable part) back to the public sector. Please do not slag the workers off and say that they are being vidictive, they aren't. And please don't say that if you dont like the job then move, its that attitude that causes the race to the bottom. People who are seen as 'unskilled workers' work very hard in other regards though you may not realise it, and they deserve respect too

Emma Blackwell ● 962d