ComReg USO Submissions now available

damien

http://www.comreg.ie/publications/default.asp?ctype=5&nid=102218

23 responses from individuals this time. Of the telcos only eircom, chorus and vodafone replied. Nothing from ALTO, Smart or BT. The ODCA actually replied too as well as IrelandOffline. Nothing as usual from the Consumers Association.

I have to say if there were prizes for best submission it would be this:

Hi, I just want to say that Ireland is unique in many ways. It is unique in the poor spread of internet and also in the high cost. It is unique in having much of the public telephone system owned and completely controlled by a private non-national company.

It is unique in doing things "the Irish way" like in allowing a private company to dictate the standard, cost, and spread of essential telephone and internet services. It is unique in putting things on a very long finger, and allowing influence (and brown paper bags) to affect the public finances and general well-being.
It is unique in not having a word in our daily language to convey the urgency of "manana" (manyana). It is unique in having so many "enquiries" and "Tribunals" and then doing bloody nothing with the findings!!!!

Isn't about time we were a little less unique in the above ways???

Regards,
Tony McGinley

eircomtribunal

I liked the first response. If Gerald Begley – response no. one – is on board(s), would he let us know what ComReg had to hide beneath black ink bars?

P.

eircomtribunal

Eircom's response is worth a read. Now it becomes clear why the regulator tells us so much bull****. Like about the need to balance the roll-out of broadband and the improvement of the network: eircom whispered that threat (you can have only one of those) and others in confidential submissions earlier on to the regulator who seems to have been all ear.

Eircom asks for higher LLU pricing!
Eircom speaks about removing line splitters, but soon afterwards makes it clear that it only means that they won't install them in the future that much, but only "if other solutions are not economical or practical". What a joke.
And so it goes on.

Wonder what's beneath eircom's blacked out lines?

P.

cgarvey

eircomtribunal wrote:

they won't install them in the future that much, but only "if other solutions are not economical or practical".

Hasn't that already been agreed previous to this USO?

Remember the whole notion that pairgains were illegal floating around here .. only they never were, and still aren't (and are unlikely to be).. but didn't they agreee that they wouldn't be used unless there were no cost-effective alternatives? In a previous USO presumably, but I don't know?

.cg

eircomtribunal

cgarvey wrote:

but didn't they agreee that they wouldn't be used unless there were no cost-effective alternatives?

Why does ComReg not see the ridiculousness of this rule? It pretends to deal with the scourge of carriers, when in effect it does next to nothing. If there were cheaper ways in a given case than deploying a carrier, then Eircom would be the first to use the cheaper means. [Unless of course they figured into their consideration the factor that deploying a pair gain will give them more future revenue from forced dial-up.]

There was a stipulation from ComReg that eircom had to remove carrier systems whenever an unbundler requested to have an unbundled customer line "cleaned". Comreg told me that it had happened on occasions – but with the state of unbundling this is negligible.

P.

damien

I don't think that eircom are obliged to remove pairgains for anyone, customer or unbundler. They can be asked and they can say yes or no.

There are still pairgains being installed and in new estates.