Ofcom BT proposal is a fudge rather than regulation that UK will need following the EU referendum

Whilst having breakfast today Ofcom published it proposal for BT Openreach following the year long review of how structural separation is servicing the market a decade after it's creation. Ofcom's Chief Executive Sharon White spoke on BBC Radio 4's Today programme to explain what the thinking was on fixing the failed provision of broadband and the fastest way to to turn things around. Her key message was that spinning out Openreach was too complex and would take too long and so forcing BT to create an independent Chair and improved reporting was going to allow changes to take place faster.

BT didn't seem to have any problems splitting Cellnet out and thus should not have issues with Openreach.  The problem this time is the state of the Pension scheme and complex contracts.

After White had left the radio studio her place was taken by BT's CEO and his opposite number at Talk Talk to have their say on the proposal. As could be expected Dido Harding was disappointed that Ofcom did not take a harder line. Gavin Patterson's response could have been a comedy routine at the BT managers away day, his best line was, "BT does not game Ofcom".

Over the past ten years BT has spent £10Bn investing in Broadband Services and in an effort to hold off break up offered to spend £6Bn in the next three years.  Too often consumers and businesses in Britain are complaining that the current infrastructure is woeful and the offer to double spending in the next three years is not going to raise satisfaction.

The 2010 spending review by George Osborne resulted in budgets cuts to Ofcom which means that a review that should have been completed in 12 months will take over two years.  BT and its rivals all have more lawyers and economists than Ofcom and are capable of gaming the regulatory processes.

Some on Twitter seem to think that this is another victory for BT 

yes, it is BT 1: Ofcom 0. Conduct regulation has failed, and this is just more failure. @AnnRobinson8

— John Fingleton (@JohnFingleton1) July 26, 2016

John Singleton is the former head of the OFT and he seems underwhelmed by the proposals.

If we want better infrastructure for broadband then it's best served by Openreach becoming a business in its own right and being able to raise capital on its own behalf rather than competition for budget with other BT subsidiaries and group commitments such as Pensions which at the moment is £12Bn in debt. Theresa May's new Industrial strategy hopefully will see the Government reject the proposal and seek BT's break up.

Is it possible to fix BT?

Ofcom has started another review into how BT effects the UK telecoms market, so 10 years after the first review. At the same time the CMA are looking at it's plans to buy EE.

This regulatory overview gives a chance to review how BT operates in the UK and what could be done to improve things.  Since the Privatisation of British Telecom the market has failed to offer an effective competitor rather it has seen a race to the bottom.  

Consumers in the UK have been very poorly served when it comes to keep up with Continental rivals when it comes to Infrastructure.  Whilst the cable industry did attempt to build out an alternative network it failed to do so with a sustainable business model and so we are faced with the situation that more households are not pasted by Virgin Media than are. The provider of the last resort is thus BT and as such is highly regulated with an obligation to wholesale network access to rivals.

Thirty years ago Britain got its first mobile networks, one of those had access to enough rooftops to build infrastructure needed up until 2000 thanks to it's only property portfolio and captive business accounts.  The other was Vodafone, a small start up based at the end of the Thames Valley with a sleepy parent focused on the defence industry.  Yet because BT focused on doing things that impeded its rival rather than do what was needed they failed so sceptically that they were forced to divest the Mobile business.

When it comes to the Broadband business it has repeated the same mistakes, rather than invest in the Network so that it was the best possible it has played games with rivals seeking to do just enough to avoid sanction.  We thus find ourselves in the UK operating behind the curve when it comes to digital services because of slow speeds and over capacity.

The last review took Ofcom two years to complete and saw the creation of Openreach as an effective remedy. Hindsight has proved that the actions have not worked and BT rivals are now asking for the business to be spun off from it's parent in an effort to improve capital investment. Such a option will not solve the investment lag rather it will make it worse.

I saw recent analysis of the performance of BT shares over the last fifteen years which highlight that the Management had managed to offer a negative return of some 20+% one of the worse performance with the FTSE 100. Thus shareholder seem just as ineffectual as regulators to force the Executives to run the business.    

Thoughts on BT

So Yesterday we had the presentation of the BT results for the last year and the headline analysis can be read on the FT, BBC, Independent and Times amongst other sources.

What gets me is that Ian Livingstone has used accounting tricks to hide what the future looks like. Lookig at BT Retail the core revenue streams are ALL declining and yet the Division managed to increase its profit. Going forward if my own experience is common they will lose even more money, the retention costs for me staying on the BT network are more than the money I am paying them the poor user experience means that I have stopped using BT Vision on demand services.

The Cost Cutting plan is a recruitment freeze rather than intelligent restructuring of the Workforce. This is because of the fact that we are looking at the heavy unionisation of the Openreach division which could become a car crash similar to Global Services (Talk Talk and Tiscali merging will lower the number of truck roles for LLU). If the cost base in GS is wrong why has so little been written down on the Balance Sheet and why are we not seeing large scale redundancies in India of BT staff?

However the big issue I have with Livingstone is the lack of a Vision when it comes to the future. In the middle of the Digital Britain review would his predecessor have stayed quite or used the annual results as an opportunity to talk up high speed broadband? With BT needing to become a software company if the investment in 21CN is to be profitable what progress is being made and how will BT be at the centre of new services?

Could the emphasis on fixing the pension fund be because Livingstone and his Board what a nest to rival that of the former RBS Executives under Fred Godwin?