Is Sky actively taking the mickey!

[Glynn+Alexander]

Is sky taking the (removed) or what? 

I had an original provisional appointment on the 7/7/22 to install fibre as we are currently just on normal copper cable.

We have had excuses after excuses as to why this is taking so long, from some (removed) who layed the cables blocking the pipe with a bit of rope, to needing permissions from the council to re-dig and then claiming it's not connected somewhere along the line so we have to wait even longer..

You know what, I've kept my mouth shut, I've tolerated this incompetance and waited very patiently.

Until today, today you have started charging me as if these services have already been activated.. 

Are you (removed) well kidding me! 

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Glynn+Alexander wrote:

We have had excuses after excuses as to why this is taking so long, from some (removed) who layed the cables blocking the pipe with a bit of rope, to needing permissions from the council to re-dig and then claiming it's not connected somewhere along the line so we have to wait even longer..

---

Those are Openreach infrastructure issues and may well be entirely correct: any particular ISP has no influence on getting them resolved.  Our FTTP (from BT) took more than three months to be installed because a metre of new in-pavement ducting was required to get the cable to the edge of our property.

If FTTP billing has started from Sky then there's been an administrative error somewhere, and you'll need to contact them to resolve it.

[GD1]

@Glynn+Alexander  I'm afraid you are not talkingdirect to Sky, we are all customers here.  

You will need to call Sky regarding the broadband installation.

You can call on 150 from a Sky Talk Line or Sky Mobile.

If you haven't got a current Sky Mobile or Sky Talk this link should help:
(UK) https://www.sky.com/help/home Scroll down and click on ‘Need more help’ and it provides a 0333 number
(ROI) on the same link change the flag in the very bottom corner to the ROI flag to obtain an 0818 number.

Stay on the line and don’t hang up if prompted to. Apparently the quieter times to ring are just after 7am or about 9pm.

[Kirsty+S27]

Hi @Glynn+Alexander 

I wanted to advise I have removed inappropriate language on your post.

As @TimmyBGood and @GD1 correctly advised please contact Sky directly regarding the issue. 

Thank you. 

[Glynn+Alexander]

Innapropate to you, but not the occasion

[Glynn+Alexander]

Also, Sky may not directly control openreach, but they have obviously signed and agreed a contract that allows such bland language that ensures the forwarding of useless platitudes and useless information within messages passed to sky customers.

[Glynn+Alexander]

Lastly I'm more than aware I'm not talking directly to sky, I posted this in order to direct a conversation into the legitimacy of a corporation subcontracting to another organisation and for that organisation to be allowed to not provide and sometimes even refuse to give proper updates that are not just bland generic replies

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Glynn+Alexander wrote:

they have obviously signed and agreed a contract that allows such bland language that ensures the forwarding of useless platitudes and useless information within messages passed to sky customers.

---

Openreach are obliged to treat all their client ISPs equally: there's a unit within Ofcom dedicated to ensuring that.  Unfortunately this has effectively resulted in lowest-common-denominator communication being standardised and situations such as yours become incredibly frustrating: no-one pretends this is satisfactory, but government, which at the end of the day is responsible for the legacy of privatisation in the 1980s, has been otherwise occupied.

This is an interesting read on the topic:

We all want to see Openreach succeed as a flexible, customer-responsive strategic partner, upon which we can rely for prompt service and strategic investment in the nation’s vital infrastructure assets. FCS believes this goal is frustrated not by lack of management expertise or even investment, but by a systemic cultural drag resulting from the legacy of nationalised monopoly privilege and the ongoing ownership by BT plc.

https://www.fcs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/FCS-response-re-Openreach-Strategic-Independence.p... 

[Glynn+Alexander]

Sorry to me but your response makes absolutely zero sense.

If Ofcom created and set this rule, and Ofcom is effectly managed an owned by government, why on earth are you stating this is a problem with privatisation?

If it does indeed boil down to Ofcom restrictions and these restrictions make no sense for the customer then surely the solution is to get government nose out of the business of markets, since government seem to love lobbiests so much, ISP's should utilise that, government should not be in control of anything that is not a municipal.

A good example is trains, people think that trains are bad because they are private, but that is an absurd simplistic explaination made by those who either have no clue about the railway or who are ideologically pushing certain ideas as the trains are ran by private companies, but the railway is owned, ran and regulated by government so restriction are made on innovations private companies can make.

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Glynn+Alexander wrote:

If Ofcom created and set this rule, and Ofcom is effectly managed an owned by government, why on earth are you stating this is a problem with privatisation?

---

Privatisation of BT Group left Openreach as a wholly-owned division within it.  This means every other ISP which uses Openreach cabling is obliged to pay for what's effectively BT-owned infrastructure and personnel to deliver their products while being in competition with BT Broadband, a situation which has been bodged around ever since.

[Glynn+Alexander]

So which is it?

Either this regulation is the result of Ofcom regulations and therefore the fault lays squarely at government hands, or is this just a rule that a private company contracts to obey which can be changed by a simple refusal to use that perticular organisation for their services?

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Glynn+Alexander wrote:

a rule that a private company contracts to obey which can be changed by a simple refusal to use that perticular organisation for their services?

---

How do you suggest ISPs deliver their product to the vast majority of UK households that only have Openreach-owned, managed and maintained communication cabling?  The GPO/BT/Openreach have spent something like a century getting their infrastructure in place: while altnet ISPs who lay their own cable certainly exist (and in the case of Virgin have done for decades) it's going to take them a while to catch up...

[Glynn+Alexander]

If these businesses wanted to stay in business, to which the rhetoric is that they are greedy, then they will find a way to make it work.

Greed in itself seems like a bad thing, but when it comes to the market, the more greedy an organisation is, the better it is for everyone else because they will always be trying to get more customers by improving services and innovating solutions, but the greatest thing about free markets, is that competition also keeps prices down having the result of keeping they greed in check when it comes to the consumer.. the customer benefits soo much more.

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Glynn+Alexander wrote:

If these businesses wanted to stay in business, to which the rhetoric is that they are greedy, then they will find a way to make it work.

---

Absolutely, but that involves either wrestling ownership of existing monopoly infrastructure away from Openreach (ultimately a political decision) or laying down an alternative national network (or more likely multiples thereof) of ducts, poles, cabinets and cabling from scratch: how much would you like your monthly broadband bill to increase so that your ISP can afford to do that (and how lumpy do you want your road to be)?

This is just historical context to try and understand how we are where we are, and why Sky (or BT, or TalkTalk, or Vodafone) can't magic up a solution to your Openreach ducting issue any more than they could get mine past that lamp post in any reasonable timescale...

[Glynn+Alexander]

If ISP's stopped using openreach and simply 'said' they were going to create their own infrastructure, then demonstrated the intent by leaving openreach, or better still, they start to create their own infrastructure over time, openreach as a 'greedy' company would have four options.

1) go out of business once other ISP's have enough infrastructure.

2) Change their business model to deal directly with the customer by becoming an ISP.

3) Sell their cables to another organisation who would probably use them to create their own ISP service to get a very temporary monopoly. (Not the best option for the customer)

4) Change the way they work to meet ISP demands.

This is not rocket science, it's very basic economics with a little bit of social science.

If on the other hand (as you still haven't clarified whether Ofcom or the private businesses are in control) Ofcom is the issue, I backpeddle to my previous statement that they should lobby for a change in regulation or removal of it entirely.