From: cmillard@energis.co.uk
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 4:46 PM
To: mark.ballett@virgin.net; paumarkham@aol.com
Cc: Martin_Kingston@kingston-comms.co.uk
Subject: Option 2 Bow Wave - a new approach

****************************************************************************
****************************
This e-mail is from Energis plc, 50 Victoria Embankment, London, EC4Y 0DE,
United 
Kingdom, No: 2630471.

This e-mail is confidential to the addressee and may be privileged. The
views 
expressed are personal and do not necessarily reflect those of Energis. If
you are not 
the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately by calling our
switchboard on 
+44 (0) 20 7206 5555 and do not disclose to another person or use, copy or
forward 
all or any of it in any form.

****************************************************************************
****************************



Dear All,
Following our last Commercial sub-committee discussions and the common
feeling
that we were trying to solve the wrong problem, I would like to seed the
discussion prior to our meeting on 29th June with some ideas.

1.  OBJECTIVE
To give all operators parity in their ability to gain a specific customer
for
telecommunications products, especially for broadband products, and to make
a
reasonable profit having gained the customer.

(Note:  To achieve this, OLO do not need access to the local loop, as with
CPS.
BT need to provide an ADSL CPS equivalent such as EU Option 3)

2.  CURRENT OPTION 2 PRODUCT
The current Option 2 product is flawed in the following ways:
     No good as a targetted product to specifically identified customers (no
     guarantee of access).
     No guarantee of getting access to specific sales areas.
     No clear time-scale for roll-out delivery to specified sales areas.
     Other operators can gain access to my key customers' local loop whilst
I
     can be excluded (applicable to all operators)
     Arbitrary in access allocation; in that I cannot reliably plan sales &
     marketing coverage or core network capacity until I have a PCR3.
     Complex ordering process from PCR1 to room build.
     Separate planning and build for each order increases cost considerably.
     Ordering and build process are very time consuming.

3.  PROPOSED NEW PRODUCT (for 1 Sep 2000)
I propose that BT agree to provide a managed room to an agreed level that
conforms to IEE specifications.  From the indicative forecasts BT can
identify
the 1000 most popular locations and build rooms in them in parallel.
Operators
can then be allocated space in the room.  Operators may request a dedicated
room, as with the current product, but this will always be a lower priority
to
the community room.

   3.1  Advantages
        Speed of roll-out
        Clear delivery dates for access
        Lack of complexity in process
        Reduced costs
        More and earlier information on space availability

   3.2Disadvantages
        BT cost recovery
        Still not guaranteed access

I know that people are all ready talking around this but we need to clearly
state a requirement and that we need it for 1 Sept.

I hope this is useful, please distribute as appropriate.
Chris Millard
Energis.  07769-640939