I suppose the profits Richard Li & Co have pocketed from their monopolies, comms swindles and luxury residential complexes like the Cyberport (let's thank the generous HK gov't too) remain too small for PCCW to afford upgrading the antiquated 'broadband' setup of HK's third largest island.

There's no competition, so they don't need to. Just let it get slower and slower as it gets more overloaded, and charge more and more.

Hutchison could wipe the floor with PCCW if they plugged in the fibre they laid all over the village four fucking years ago -- half the price, 30 times the speed. But they can squeeze more out of mobiles, 4G whatever, so they leave it dark.

In conclusion, the existing laws in Hong Kong including telecommunications regulation, competition law and consumer protection law, are not sufficiently capable of addressing problems arising from discriminatory practices if found to be market failures that justify regulatory intervention.

They're basically asking you to cough up an additional HK$128/mnth for nothing.

I learned something rather interesting yesterday (maybe others already know this, but...) the HGC Broadband cable that was laid on Lamma several years ago is for the use of HK Electric's Power Station, and not for the use of Lamma Residents.
This news was conveyed by the guy who, yesterday 26th March '15, was standing close to the ATMs, selling NOW tv etc, and in answer to my question of 'When might we get broadband internet on Lamma?'
Perhaps HKE paid for the cable, but I wonder if they might be persuaded to open their cable to the rest of us?

Regulator turning deaf ear over HKT

I have recently had reason to complain to the Office of the Communications Authority (Ofca) about the appalling service meted out to me by HKT on Lamma Island.
In its reply, the authority told me that in a fully liberalised market, it should not interfere in matters affecting the service quality, maintenance arrangements and complaints handling provided by telecom companies.
In a fully liberalised market, with proper and reliable consumer information, it is true that consumers can indeed rely on the workings of the market to deal with their grievances - if they don't like one company, they cancel their contracts and go to another.
However, on Lamma and other outlying islands, we are stuck with the fact that HKT operates as a de facto monopoly.
Residents cannot, therefore, rely on the benefits of a "fully liberalised market" as we have nowhere else to go. We are stuck with an omnipotent HKT.
If Ofca will not exercise its powers to protect our interests, then the only other option for us is to use the courts, which takes time, patience and money.
While I agree with Ofca's position in the parts of Hong Kong where a free market does actually exist, it must look very hard at its role in supporting customers who live in the outlying islands.
Regulators exist to prevent companies abusing their licences and to protect against the failures of the market, and there is no doubt that we need their protection.

Lee Faulkner, Lamma