NETWORK PERSPECTIVE
of its fibre offering) loom large over the market. This charge is not as clear-cut as the first, and we delve deeper into the subjective morality. Have rules been broken or merely the spirit of competition been stretched? Dominant market position is shouted in the corridors of INCA summits, but whispered in the lobby of One Braham Street (BT Group’s swanky new HQ). Openreach is powerful – unquestionably so – but power alone is not unfair. Much of the behaviour under fire sits squarely within the letter of the law. And it is here, in the space between legality and legitimacy, that the regulator enters the frame. Equinox, for all its controversy, was consulted on, examined and ultimately sanctioned by Ofcom. Twice. As we introduce the playwright as a material witness, it becomes clear that deep pockets and patience can be just as destructive as malice or unfairness. Charge three: accelerating the demise of the Altnet ecosystem. A medley of action and inaction contributes to the most existential charge of all. Altnets built quickly, ambitiously, and often bravely, but many did so on the assumption that the competitive landscape would remain broadly static long enough to pay their investors back. In this charge we ask the jury to consider how far Openreach has leveraged the financial and penetration challenges that are now causing the Altnets so much pain and on which side of the moral fence that leverage lies. No sane observer doubts that consolidation is coming. The only real disagreement is on the scale. My former boss, Paul Alexander at Nokia, suggested in the last edition of this magazine that the UK might support “five to ten significant players.” I believe that figure is optimistic by a factor of two or three. What the jury must decide is whether Openreach is actively narrowing the field or merely benefiting as the market does the work for it. The Case for the Defence In any legal case, the defence deserves a fair hearing. Openreach would not feel the need to address each charge individually. They would simply say that fair markets, competition and regulation define and even encourage everything that they do. To consumers, Openreach is not the villain. For large swathes of the UK, they are the reason that fibre has reached their street,
acting within the roles that the regulator permits them. That is convenient, but curious. Because when a play keeps ending the same way, it is rarely the actors who need replacing. Closing Arguments Openreach can be a hero to the general public and a villain to investors at the same time. The Altnet era will not end with a scandal or a collapse. It will end with spreadsheets, consolidation, and some difficult reckonings about who built infrastructure and who built businesses. If this were a simpler case, the verdict would already be obvious. But it isn’t. The defendant has played hard, though not unlawfully. The challengers have fought bravely, though not always sustainably. The playwright’s script remains in force. The jury is therefore invited to retire and to consider not just who acted, but why the ending feels so familiar. One thing is certain: this story is not finished. Whether you reach a verdict or not, there will be another phase to this story. A phase that focuses on stitching networks together, integrating systems, and turning fragmented footprints into sustainable platforms. The next gold rush is not digging trenches, but making economic sense of what’s already been dug.
so their children can binge the latest Netflix release or keep abreast of who’s dating who in the Love Island villa. All of that at a reasonable price and solid reliability. These are the outcomes regulators dream of. The outcomes politicians quietly, or not so quietly, take credit for. And ultimately, why Openreach continues to wage war against any challenger to their crown as the national utility of the United Kingdom. Indeed, who could criticise them for prioritising safety, standardisation and scale. The very qualities that frustrate challengers are the ones that keep the system upright. Added to that, Openreach would highlight the vast sums of money, vast pages of regulation and vast amount of time spent in front of parliamentary committees that it takes to operate a national utility of their quality. They may well quote Jim Gordon from Batman, “not the hero we deserved, but the hero we needed.” Witness Testimony from the Gallery Before you retire to consider the verdict, one character remains largely offstage. Ofcom, the playwright of this particular production who writes the rules and decides which scenes are permissible, has so far escaped the boos from the stalls. More so, at several recent events I attended, including the INCA summit last year, the Ofcom spokesperson attracted far less barracking than the Openreach sacrificial lamb. That surprised me. It shouldn’t be overlooked that all of the characters on the UK fibre stage are only
Court adjourned. Consolidation pending.
Volume 48 No.1 MARCH 2026
35
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker