Re: it's not private infrastructure
Substitute "needs" for "requirements" if you must. Read it as "does everything they want" if you like. But the point is that if somebody simply has a POTS phone and nothing else because they don't need, want or require any sort of internet or somebody else has ADSL or FTTC and nothing else because they don't need, want or require anything fast why should they have their prices raised because you want Netflix for yourself and your kids to watch two different films whilst another of your kids plays online games and you don't want to pay the full whack for that?
The plain fact is that you're asking for a subsidy. If BT/Openreach take out loans to install an FTTP network for those who want it the interest and capital on those loans should be paid by those who are making use of that network and not by those who aren't. If, when those loans and interest have been paid off, the economics of the maintenance of the two systems might look different and FTTP might well be cheaper than the legacy network. Loading the costs of building it onto those who do not intend to take it up is simply inequitable.
Frankly a better way of investing would be to continue rolling out a better service to those who cannot even get a decent ADSL connection. That's the other side of the argument. Upgrading the existing better connected areas will inevitably take away resources from extending the existing fibre network. Living in the country I can think of a number of premises where FTTP might well be a sensible option - properties are so thinly spread that FTTC isn't going to work well. Fine, subsidise those who live and work there rather than have them subsidise those who already have a good service to get an even better one.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
