Eircom to roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 66 towns

Johnboy1951

ED E wrote: »

Murph is right. If you build a new house and ask ESB to connect you a bill of €2000 wouldnt be a surprise. But 10% for top tier broadband? "Thats a ripoff". Irish consumers dont value good telcos, the bill is the only thing that matters. People change provider for €24 saving per annum.


I'd be of the opinion that all rural fibre and NBP customers should pay a one time €500 connection fee to help support the build out, Ireland is an expensive place to cover. Lets not bankrupt the W/S firms we need to actually get it done. The problem arises for the smaller line operators like Paul who can't afford a large loss leader that their competition may run with (probably as part of a big quad play deal).

The emboldened sentence is the only thing I agree with in this post.

damienirel

murphaph wrote: »

I think there's a serious problem if people are having difficulty paying a measly €270 for FTTH. I mean, all other utilities cost significantly more than that to get connected.

For once I find myself agreeing with you!
I think that the whole telecoms industry is afraid to invest because of undercutting etc. Meanwhile ESB have a complete monopoly - also if we install solar panels etc. they won't buy back from us - they get away with murder compared to Eir etc. But hey who have you to thank for that but FF and Mary O'Rourke. That's the great legacy that they left us - and all the crap that followed but we'll be voting them in again in the next elections.

Gonzo

the people who are not taking up FTTH in rural areas because its too expensive obviously don't need it much. Either they have ok ADSL or are already on VDSL or just don't care much about using the internet other than social media. I can understand slow uptake in urban areas where cheaper decent VDSL and Virgin Media already exist, but the rural areas are totally different.

Any single person or family who regularly need the internet for streaming TV, downloading Sky On Demand, gaming, work and other uses who have crap rural internet would take the upgrade to FTTH in a heartbeat. Infact Eir upgrade customers for free to the 150meg package and there is no installation charge, so i am amazed and indeed worried. However the amount of places live with FTTH right now is so small we would not be able to form an overall picture yet. All the families on our road cannot wait to abandon their 5-12 meg connections for FTTH.

Johnboy1951

Gonzo wrote: »

the people who are not taking up FTTH in rural areas because its too expensive obviously don't need it much. Either they have ok ADSL or are already on VDSL or just don't care much about using the internet other than social media. I can understand slow uptake in urban areas where cheaper decent VDSL and Virgin Media already exist, but the rural areas are totally different.

I reckon because it is lack of understanding and information.
The cost of 150Mb/s on fibre seems to be the same as 3Mb/s over copper.

Any single person or family who regularly need the internet for streaming TV, downloading Sky On Demand, gaming, work and other uses who have crap rural internet would take the upgrade to FTTH in a heartbeat. Infact Eir upgrade customers for free to the 150meg package and there is no installation charge, so i am amazed and indeed worried. However the amount of places live with FTTH right now is so small we would not be able to form an overall picture yet. All the families on our road cannot wait to abandon their 5-12 meg connections for FTTH.

Those on crap broadband have never used streaming TV etc so do not perceive the need for it (mostly).
Again it will take time and information for people to realise what they can and cannot do, and how a fibre connection, at similar cost to present slow broadband, will enable them to do much more.

Most people in my area could not tell you what speed their 'broadband' is ...... they would not even be able to run a test to find out, without specific instructions! Heck, I doubt they know the difference between a browser and an operating system!

IMO it will take many years before the majority of rural dwellers appreciate or have the need of a fibre connection.

None of which implies fibre should not be available to all if they want it.

MajesticDonkey

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

IMO it will take many years before the majority of rural dwellers appreciate or have the need of a fibre connection.

None of which implies fibre should not be available to all if they want it.

I would echo this, and as such:

I'd be of the opinion that all rural fibre and NBP customers should pay a one time €500 connection fee to help support the build out

I think this would do nothing but decrease the fast uptake of the service, but 98% of people would simply not pay it.

oscarBravo

A couple of things to remember: one is that the €270 is a once-off charge, the first time FTTH is installed in a premises. It will gradually become less of an issue as penetration increases (there would be no such charge, for example, if someone moved into a house with an existing ONT and order a connection). It will also be interesting to see how it features in the various NBP bids, because there are significant differences between the installation charges of the wholesale operators as it is.

The other thing to keep in mind is that it's a charge from open eir to the retailer, and it's up to the retailer to decide how to handle it. The options are, basically, to pass some or all of it on, or to lock the customer into a longer contract until the monthly margin has covered the up-front costs.

tsue921i8wljb3

oscarBravo wrote: »

A couple of things to remember: one is that the €270 is a once-off charge, the first time FTTH is installed in a premises. It will gradually become less of an issue as penetration increases (there would be no such charge, for example, if someone moved into a house with an existing ONT and order a connection). It will also be interesting to see how it features in the various NBP bids, because there are significant differences between the installation charges of the wholesale operators as it is.

The other thing to keep in mind is that it's a charge from open eir to the retailer, and it's up to the retailer to decide how to handle it. The options are, basically, to pass some or all of it on, or to lock the customer into a longer contract until the monthly margin has covered the up-front costs.

Bit of a niche case but what if a home had a Siro ONT and the customer wanted to move to an Openeir reseller or vice versa. Are the two ONTs interchangeable?

oscarBravo

Bodie Stale Jawbreaker wrote: »

Bit of a niche case but what if a home had a Siro ONT and the customer wanted to move to an Openeir reseller or vice versa. Are the two ONTs interchangeable?

Nope. They're connected to completely separate fibre networks. It's not at all out of the question that a home could end up with multiple ONTs from different wholesale providers, mind you.

godskitchen

Lads, no way could any business absorb that install fee without a 3 year contract.

I would agree with a €500 install.

I would let the customer pay it off monthly to eir irrespective oh which provider they move to in the future. If you fail to pay towards the €500 install until it's paid off then your disconnected.

The costs in this roll out are massive. I certainly wouldn't want to be in eirs position of having to subsidise a competitor. Which is what they would be doing.

If the cost is too high then simply don't get the service. I have been saying for years that people say "I'd pay anything for fibre" and that not being true. It turns out the pay anything = free installation and €65/month.

We need perspective here, there are companies I work for in London that would pay £100k and £1000s per month for the type of connection Balla Mart now has. Let that sink in, Balla Mart has a 1gbps internet connection, for farmers and cows. Places in the center of London are on 10mb.

I'm the first one to put this country down but on the subject of the internet, it won't be long before we are world leaders.

damienirel

In fairness - people are splashing €1000 or very close to it on phones that need upgrading every couple of years - maybe not in one down payment but in 2 and 3 year contracts - can't see how fibre customers wouldn't put the same value on a proper service.
Although in Ireland businesses tend to gouge the customers so I can see why paranoia arises in cases like this.

I know which I'd be happier paying for - fast internet in the home or a shiny new phone.

pegasus1

murphaph wrote: »

I think there's a serious problem if people are having difficulty paying a measly €270 for FTTH. I mean, all other utilities cost significantly more than that to get connected.

Yes, But the city dweller would need to pay the same installation fee for FTTH too .. So it puts everyone in the same boat .

pegasus1

Lads, don't be giving Eir or any other company idea's...for sure they would have someone monitor online forums on the QT...We are not a focus group for them...:rolleyes:

ED E

Bodie Stale Jawbreaker wrote: »

Bit of a niche case but what if a home had a Siro ONT and the customer wanted to move to an Openeir reseller or vice versa. Are the two ONTs interchangeable?

oscarBravo wrote: »

Nope. They're connected to completely separate fibre networks. It's not at all out of the question that a home could end up with multiple ONTs from different wholesale providers, mind you.

I think what Navi was asking is could installers fit a new ODP and then reuse the ONT (So SIRO ONT, OpenEir glass). If they're both using Huawei gear it would be technically possible except: the mac wouldnt register. With GPON its one OLT to many ONT, how they know who's who is the ONTs MACs are mapped to CRNs(equivalent to UANs here). If you were to use a foreign ONT the OLT wouldnt know who to send your traffic to.

pegasus1 wrote: »

Lads, don't be giving Eir or any other company idea's...for sure they would have someone monitor online forums on the QT...We are not a focus group for them...:rolleyes:

You still have a net gain so dont worry. Conservatively you gain 3.5% value on the gaff so even a €60k cottage in Roscommon is up €2100-fee.

9726_9726

oscarBravo wrote: »

A couple of things to remember: one is that the €270 is a once-off charge, the first time FTTH is installed in a premises. It will gradually become less of an issue as penetration increases (there would be no such charge, for example, if someone moved into a house with an existing ONT and order a connection). It will also be interesting to see how it features in the various NBP bids, because there are significant differences between the installation charges of the wholesale operators as it is.

The other thing to keep in mind is that it's a charge from open eir to the retailer, and it's up to the retailer to decide how to handle it. The options are, basically, to pass some or all of it on, or to lock the customer into a longer contract until the monthly margin has covered the up-front costs.

Yes, OB, is correct here in that Openeir are charging operators €270 (ex VAT mind, so that will translate to €332 in chargeable billings to the customer) to the operator for connecting the customer. However Eir *retail* are giving it for free. So Eir have a distinct advantage here, slashing 12 months off their ROI against say, Westnet, Digiweb or Pure.

Is it fair for these companies? I mean say they took on 10K customers in a year, that's €2.7M they'd have to sink before washing their face. Add in subsidised dual band gigabit router at maybe €40 a pop, call it €3.1M.

Should there not be an expectation that customers bear some of the real cost of the service? Debate!

ED E

9726_9726 wrote: »

Add in subsidised dual band gigabit router at maybe €40 a pop

They arent paying that, not nearly.

damienirel

ED E wrote: »

You still have a net gain so dont worry. Conservatively you gain 3.5% value on the gaff so even a €60k cottage in Roscommon is up €2100-fee.

Better money spent than on a new samsung galaxy or iphone.

Johnboy1951

9726_9726 wrote: »

Yes, OB, is correct here in that Openeir are charging operators €270 (ex VAT mind, so that will translate to €332 in chargeable billings to the customer) to the operator for connecting the customer. However Eir *retail* are giving it for free. So Eir have a distinct advantage here, slashing 12 months off their ROI against say, Westnet, Digiweb or Pure.

Is it fair for these companies? I mean say they took on 10K customers in a year, that's €2.7M they'd have to sink before washing their face. Add in subsidised dual band gigabit router at maybe €40 a pop, call it €3.1M.

Should there not be an expectation that customers bear some of the real cost of the service? Debate!

I do not understand where you see unfairness.
You think it unfair that some companies offer a better price to their customers than others?

What makes you believe that customers are not paying the connection fee or amounts designed to cover it?

You think customers should pay twice? .... or maybe get the option to pay the connection fee up front and then get a reduced monthly charge?

I really am failing to see any logic in what you are saying ...... unless you believe that eir retail do not have to pay openeir the connection fee ....

9726_9726

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I do not understand where you see unfairness.
You think it unfair that some companies offer a better price to their customers than others?

No, the discussion is about wholesale price, not retail....

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

What makes you believe that customers are not paying the connection fee or amounts designed to cover it?

My whole argument is about margins. I know how all this works.

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

You think customers should pay twice? .... or maybe get the option to pay the connection fee up front and then get a reduced monthly charge?

Where did I say I "think customers should pay twice"? Are you referring to OLOs or retail customers? Can you clarify?

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I really am failing to see any logic in what you are saying ...... unless you believe that eir retail do not have to pay openeir the connection fee ....

I believe that Eir, a foreign-owned corporation, as a regulated company with SMP (Significant Market Power), who inherited the Irish pole and duct infrastructure, should operate on a level playing field with other companies. Whether Eir retail pay Eir wholesale or not, it all goes into group accounts. So I believe that for a true deregulated environment to exist, there should be parity between Eir's retail and wholesale offerings.

From a consumer's point of view, I believe that people should have true choice in who they want to purchase their utilities from. They are going to have to pay the cost plus margin of the service one way or another, but this should be done transparently.

kippy

9726_9726 wrote: »

I believe that Eir, a foreign-owned corporation, as a regulated company with SMP (Significant Market Power), who inherited the Irish pole and duct infrastructure, should operate on a level playing field with other companies. Whether Eir retail pay Eir wholesale or not, it all goes into group accounts. So I believe that for a true deregulated environment to exist, there should be parity between Eir's retail and wholesale offerings.

From a consumer's point of view, I believe that people should have true choice in who they want to purchase their utilities from. They are going to have to pay the cost plus margin of the service one way or another, but this should be done transparently.

Yep, agreed. In much the same way as ESB Customer Supply and ESB Networks is split. Same type of model should have applied with Telecom Eireann back in the day.

ED E

kippy wrote: »

Same type of model should have applied with Telecom Eireann back in the day.

Could never have happened in TE times, but could have been done in the early Eircom years.

PAKNET

9726_9726 wrote: »

Yes, OB, is correct here in that Openeir are charging operators €270 (ex VAT mind, so that will translate to €332 in chargeable billings to the customer) to the operator for connecting the customer. However Eir *retail* are giving it for free. So Eir have a distinct advantage here, slashing 12 months off their ROI against say, Westnet, Digiweb or Pure.

Is it fair for these companies? I mean say they took on 10K customers in a year, that's €2.7M they'd have to sink before washing their face. Add in subsidised dual band gigabit router at maybe €40 a pop, call it €3.1M.

Should there not be an expectation that customers bear some of the real cost of the service? Debate!

Eir are trying to build market share and get people tied into quad-play bundles. Probably a certain amount of loss leading going on on the side of retail.

Get people on fibre then try and upsell them to their higher tier voice packages, TV and mobile. They're practically giving the mobile service away when it's bundled up into a quad play package.

There's also hidden underlying aspects that have to be taken into account where Eir try and recoup costs such as charging you per GB over 1TB monthly usage (despite advertising it as an "unlimited" package), whereas Digiweb/Pure don't, they'll just warn you. The upfront install fee might be better value than Eir's no upfront!

godskitchen

PAKNET wrote: »

Eir are trying to build market share and get people tied into quad-play bundles. Probably a certain amount of loss leading going on on the side of retail.

Get people on fibre then try and upsell them to their higher tier voice packages, TV and mobile. They're practically giving the mobile service away when it's bundled up into a quad play package.

There's also hidden underlying aspects that have to be taken into account where Eir try and recoup costs such as charging you per GB over 1TB monthly usage (despite advertising it as an "unlimited" package), whereas Digiweb/Pure don't, they'll just warn you. The upfront install fee might be better value than Eir's no upfront!

The amount of people that go over 1tb is tiny. It will remain tiny even with ftth.

I really don't know what some of you guys expect people to be downloading?

9726_9726

godskitchen wrote: »

The amount of people that go over 1tb is tiny. It will remain tiny even with ftth.

I really don't know what some of you guys expect people to be downloading?

Yes, a FUP has to hit 1% of subscribers or less to be called "Unlimited".

Wanderer78

godskitchen wrote:

I really don't know what some of you guys expect people to be downloading?

I'd say you'd be surprised what people would get up to with 1gb lines, I'd say a lot of high def downloads and streaming would clock up high download rates. Be interesting to know

Gonzo

godskitchen wrote: »

The amount of people that go over 1tb is tiny. It will remain tiny even with ftth.

I really don't know what some of you guys expect people to be downloading?

to me 1tb sounds tiny for such a connection, remember this is only 350gb more than Imagine's allowance on a wireless network.

I have a 9meg connection and rarely if ever 'download'. I play games online, perform some patch updates, watch netflix, download tvshows through Sky On Demand, Youtube and browsing. I know that If I had a decent connection right now I would certainly have higher internet activity. I limit myself because it just takes too long and if I do one thing, I can't do another.

Out of interest I just checked my usage on the Eir website (haven't checked in years) and now it's reading 210.96 GB. I presume my data cab is the same as FTTH set at 1tb per month.

Will be interesting to see how soon I use up 1tb data allowance once I finally do get that vastly much faster connection.

OverRide

Thing is though Gonzo,there are only so many hours in the day to watch downloaded movies and tv shows
Monday to Friday realistically for anyone that wants to be up in time for work,who's commuting,who socialises a bit,it's going to take 2 weeks at least to get through a box set
A movie a night in hd is only 60 gigs in a month either

I'd imagine most ordinary imagine users don't use or come near their daily 20 gig allowance at that rate

godskitchen

I'd consider myself a heavy user and would get no where near 1tb a month even if I had a 1gb connection.

I do however live alone so maybe with 3 or 4 others it could be possible but I still can't see it.

damienirel

OverRide wrote: »

Thing is though Gonzo,there are only so many hours in the day to watch downloaded movies and tv shows
Monday to Friday realistically for anyone that wants to be up in time for work,who's commuting,who socialises a bit,it's going to take 2 weeks at least to get through a box set
A movie a night in hd is only 60 gigs in a month either

I'd imagine most ordinary imagine users don't use or come near their daily 20 gig allowance at that rate

I'm afraid Gonzo is correct on this one. 20gb is pretty useless once you step into the 4k domain and that will become the new norm very fast. Factor in the fact most people will stream TV - and that will fast become 4k - for everything including all sports, not just the new season of House Of Cards.
Throw in gaming at 4k etc. Also with fibre to the premises becoming more widespread throughout the world not just Ireland watch the services take advantage of that extra bandwidth very quickly(i.e true online gaming where you won't need to own a console - you'll pay a sub to get the latest fastest graphics etc.), 20gb daily allowance will become the new 2gb daily allowance - it's just the nature of it.

OverRide

godskitchen wrote: »

I'd consider myself a heavy user and would get no where near 1tb a month even if I had a 1gb connection.

I do however live alone so maybe with 3 or 4 others it could be possible but I still can't see it.

Yeah I'm assuming triple that use for a family with kids but at that you're looking at less than half a tb

What you have to understand is,getting a full movie in 30 seconds,still means you have to watch it
Even big file 4K has to be watched

The bulk of the faster speed experience is the beauty of instant no time wasted download (and for business or work at home upload)
Instant first click streaming etc
It's not a case of filling up the hard drive

sReq | uTeK

Consumption is relative to the format, it's as simple as that. With 4K (Which I believe is a fad compared to OLED TVs) meant to be the norm 1TB consumption watching a few hours a day of 4k formats whilst your kids and wife do the same on their independent devices amounts to a lot of data.