The Channel logo

back to article BT's not at home to Mr Profit, but its lordly boss probably isn't too fussed

The past few weeks over at BT Towers have been busy, fraught and disruptive. But there was no ray of sunshine in the telecom giant's latest financial results out today. The company reported flat revenue growth and a significant decline in pre-tax profit this morning for the quarter that ended on 30 June. It pulled in total …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Anonymous Coward

Re: Li'l Technical Note.

I am seeing this a lot on the reg lately. People correcting the grammar and then holding lengthy discussions over the pro/con and complex development of the english language. Are your lives really that dull?

I assume the people doing this have recently gone through some sort of classes for this or maybe its a new trend to be anal. English is a very interesting school topic because the only guarantee you have is that you are wrong. English is a language and such a well used and dynamic language that it is constantly changing in words, meaning and use.

If you cant understand the meaning of the article then that would be a valid case for people to kick up a little fuss and ask for the meaning to be explained. But the joy of using simpler language (that not used by walking dictionaries) is that even if it doesnt follow your particular set of strict rules you can still understand it.

I know I will now bring down the EDL (English Defenders of Language) but if it is valid to comment on the boards about something so stupid (instead of using the corrections link if your really sheldon cooper) then it must be as valid to voice my frustration at reading some whiny ass nonsense that it should be "its" not "it's" nor "tits".

Does anyone else get a little irritated at these comments or is it just me?

4
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: Li'l Technical Note.

"but if it is valid to comment on the boards about something so stupid (instead of using the corrections link if your really sheldon cooper) then it must be as valid to voice my frustration at reading some whiny ass nonsense that it should be "its" not "it's" nor "tits"."

Nah. It just makes you a hypocrite.

3
0
Headmaster

Re: your really sheldon cooper

you're*

9
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: your really sheldon cooper

I've been accused of being a grammar nazi before. Likewise I've fallen into grammatical slipups many times before, so why do I do it? Education.

I'm not perfect, if I make a mistake I would rather learn from it than keep makig it. At school I kept using then rather than than and not once was I corrected on it. I lost marks for using the incorrect version, but was never taught why it was incorrect. Of course then there are those who don't have English as a first language, so they pr obably weren't really taught the difference between then and than either, not the different versions of they're / there / their etc.

I fair number of grammatical slip ups I'll happily ignore, silly things like using a , instead of a ; mostly because I don't really understand that rule myself. Likewise who and whom have become interchangable in modern times. I've taught myself the rule but I won't correct others on incorrect usage. The only things that bother me are using the wrong version of there / their / they're, and using an / a in the wrong places, especially with abbreviations because the rule isn't clearly defined. For example , as it's the only one I can think of right now, HBO. I'm watching a HBO program, or an HBO program. If you read it out as letters (aitch bee oh) then you use an. Otherwise if you use the abbreviation in writing but read the full name (home box office) it's a HBO show. Isn't grammar fickle (and designed to piss you off in many cases)

I don't considering myself anal, just OCD. And I know all too well that there are gramatical errors in this post because I haven't reread it. Typing something up it's easy to miss grammatical errors because you're generally writing words from your mind. At least I do, as I type i'm reading the words out in my head. After reading through in a post writing check, I may find I've used it's instead of its (the most common mistake I make) and I've never gotten my head around putting the apostrophe after a word, just doesn't make sense to me.

In summary I'm a grammar nazi at times because I'd rather see somebody lean from their mistake than continue making it. And when it comes to articles I'll use the 'submit correction' button because if they fix a grammatical error which you've pointed out in comments you'll look like a burk.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: your really sheldon cooper

" And when it comes to articles I'll use the 'submit correction' button because if they fix a grammatical error which you've pointed out in comments you'll look like a burk."

And if the person wanting to send the correction doesn't have an email client installed?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: your really sheldon cooper

Bash your head into a wall?

0
0
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: your really sheldon cooper

" I'd rather see somebody lean from their mistake..."

But which way?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: your really sheldon cooper, @ AC 13:02

"Of course then there are those who don't have English as a first language, so they pr obably weren't really taught the difference between then and than either, not the different versions of they're / there / their etc."

Actually, as far as I'm aware using admittedly anecdotal evidence from years of forum/chat trawling/moderating/adminning in the "international online community" the average understanding of the ins and outs of english grammar and style by people who havwe it as a second language tends to far exceed that of the average native speaker. Either self-taught or formally educated.

There's really no way in between, it's either horrible pidgkin english (either live-typed or autotranslated) where you *need* to have a good grasp of the english language to deconstruct the meaning from the "code" on your screen, or it's (mostly) correct educated english where idiom is often more of a problem than actual grammar.

Here in the Netherlands all children aged 10 -14 get at least a basic primer in english, and outside of the lowest tiers of middle school english as a language is a mandatory exam subject for everyone wanting to graduate middle school/highschool. ( for the highschool kids german and french are also mandatory subjects in the pre-exam years, so that's 2-4 years of training in those languages as well.) So literacy in english is pretty good over here. ( never mind the pronunciation, but...)

YMMV for other countries, but most westen european school systems have something similar in place, as being able to correctly express yourself in the western worlds' Lingua Franca. Modern World + internat almost make it mandatory.

Never assume, dear AC... There's an even chance a foreigner has at least the same, if not better training in english than you've ever had at school...

2
0

Li'l Technical Note - and me

>>shares down nearly 2 per cent to £335.50 <<

£335 a share? Afraid not; your decimal point is in the wrong place. (Hint; the prices shown on the trading website are in pence.) So the real price is £3.3550 (although it's now down to £3.32 at lunch time)

If they were really over £300 a share, I'd cash mine in and bugger off somewhere on a very long holiday; probably long eneough to see me reach retirement age. Oh well, I can still dream!

1
0
FAIL

El Reg takes short-term City-type view?

So are you unhappy about a company taking a long-term view?

His Nibs (and the thousands of people who keep the multicoloured BT beachball turning) haven't done too badly - you can look back to a share price of just 72p in March 2009.

Costs are still going down, despite some chunky investments for the future (football and fibre). Seems pretty OK to me - usually we like to whinge about companies who don't take a view of the future. You'd be all over them if it was BT (or any other provider) taking a short-term view...

(Disclosure: I'm a modest and happy shareholder.)

2
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: El Reg takes short-term City-type view?

No what you should do, is ram as many people onto an already overcrowded backbone, invest bugger all in new rollouts, then cry foul when they don't win any contracts.

Alternatively, buy out an existing decent provider and grind it down to you own substandard piece of crap service, buy removing the bits that make the original company any good in a race to the bootom.

4
0
Anonymous Coward

Hate paying LINE RENTAL? Sign this...

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/52872

2
8
Bronze badge
Angel

Re: Hate paying LINE RENTAL? Sign this...

A particularly idiotic e-petition showing zero understanding of the costs involved. The vast majority of the cost of the phone line is in the infrastructure of the local distribution network. Quite apart from the fact the local distribution network has a real value (bear in mind it was sbeold by the government to the shareholders), and those people, pension funds and the like, are due at least some return, there is the little matter that it costs a lot to maintain as ducts, connections, telegraph poles, drop cables all deteriorate. Then rates have to be paid on the network infrastructure including the necessary ducts, cabinets, poles and exchange buildings.

15% of the cost of a phone line? Forget it. You think any organisation can actually provided a physical path to each property for about £14 per year exc VAT (which is about 15% of the regulated price of providing the loop).

It's perfectly possible for any ISP to offer a non-voice ADSL service (in fact SDSL does that). Just provide a loop. That LLU operators find it necessary to provide a phone service too in order to make the entire package financially viable is just a fact of economic provision. Just inventing random percentages of existing line rental without taking into account the cost of provision is just being clueless.

7
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: Hate paying LINE RENTAL? Sign this...

but all that will happen is the broadband price will go up, it will simply be a hidden fee. Unles you of course expect the entire infrastructure to be run, maintained and upgraded for free.

5
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Hate paying LINE RENTAL? Sign this...

And I'm guessing that was created by you MBF...aka Michael Firth?

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Hate paying LINE RENTAL? Sign this...

"That LLU operators find it necessary to provide a phone service too in order to make the entire package financially viable is just a fact of economic provision. "

So bundling voice and data is nothing to do with telco/ISP attempts at dualplay tripleplay and quadplay vendor lockin then? (voice, broadband, TV, and the fourth one might be mobile...)

Provision up poles and down holes is piss easy anyway in relative terms, any sucker with code powers can do it (though if they do try it, they really must be suckers).

The UK big issue in the years since mass market DSL caught on seems to be faultfinding and maintaining reliable high performance services on a rather creaky old voice centric last mile network from which miracles can't be expected indefinitely. (Lots of clever diagnostic stuff in the DSL specs is just ignored).

0
0
Anonymous Coward

£335.50 share price

sell sell sell sell!!

2
0
Silver badge
Holmes

Meanwhile, 5.1 million BT customers are wired up to its broadband network via the firm's copper cabling.

Technically all but a few thousand people are using 'the firm's copper cabling' since even their FTTC roll-out relies on it. True fibre connections are still a small minority of BT's connections. Of all the things the ASA has whined about I think that allowing FTTC or even VM to use the term 'fibre broadband' was wrong. Well - that and allowing 'unlimited' to be abused.

3
0
Bronze badge

indeed - both VM and FTTC services should be called fibre/copper hybrid. I think it was VM that started debasing the concept of fibre in this way. Once one starts it, then competitors have to follow.

Not that there's anything wrong with hybrid provision in principle. After all, how many people using fibre LAN infrastructure in their home? It's all about the distance over the copper that matters. Making major changes to change the last few hundred metres to fibre gets disproportionately expensive over simply exploiting the copper loop. For most domestic customers, I suspect it will be more than enough where there's a cabinet within 500m or so; arguably even 1,000m.

1
0
Silver badge
Go

I suspect it will be more than enough where there's a cabinet within 500m or so; arguably even 1,000m.

I agree. I think that 20Mb/s per member of the household is reasonable at the moment and probably for at least the rest of the decade. Given that the biggest bandwitdh hogging application is video and given the way codecs are developing it's hard to see why any individual would need more than 20Mb/s. I suppose the next generation of HD might push things a bit but I'm not convinced that's really going to take off.

No I think it's the premises that fall below 20Mb/s per member that need to be sorted out and sorted out fast. It's just a shame that the RoI for those locations is inevitably poor to non-existent.

0
0
xyz

BT....

...the Talk-Talk of telecoms, the Wonga of pay day loans, the crap in a crap sandwich

3
5

Re: BT....

"...the Talk-Talk of telecoms"

Err...say what?

There's only room for one talk talk in telecoms pal. And I paid handsomely to leave them and go back to bt.

1
0
Devil

Ian Livingston & BT

The people who imposed Phorm mass surveillance on their subscribers, and the web sites that served them.

I don't trust either of them.

2
0
Thumb Up

Hi dephormation

It does seem really difficult to avoid this mass surveillance - in many ways I think humiliation may be the ultimate answer? I've rarely sometimes considered listening in (say spouse or child) and discarded the idea on moral grounds so where does that leave people that feel the need to slurp every little byte?

0
0

Whatever happened to sewer-net as the last 100m?

10 years ago this was touted as the solution to sh!t broadband. Combine with FTTC and the throughput should be sh!t-hot (Yes yes, I'm going!)

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Opinion

Houses of Parliament in night-time

Andrew Orlowski

Come on everybody, let's upload all our stuff into Government by Cloud
Joe Tucci EMC
frustration_anger_irritation_annoyance pain

Felipe Costa

Pressure to perform for stock market bearing down on disties
Columns of coins in the cloud

Michael Cote

Anything that simple to use has got to be complex to set up

Features

Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond debate Scottish independence
You keep the call centres, Hamish, we'll take the banks
Internet of Things
Everyone loves those Things, just not on each others' terms
No email? No CRM? No Daily Mail iPad edition? You need a plan
Sinofsky's hybrid strategy looks dafter than ever