Government group to recommend €1bn telecoms investment

neverhappen

dahamsta

I was asked by Matthew Magee (Tribune) to comment on this, but unfortunately I missed his deadline. What do IrelandOffline members think about this concept? Do you think it's a good idea, that will genuinely address the problems; or that it's a short-sighted way of avoiding the real issue of tackling the comms companies?

adam

Lemming

It at least mentions the consumer alongside businesses, which can only be a step in the right direction.

The problem is, its too little too late IMHO since it will take at least 3 years according to the article. Long-term it looks promising though.

And in typical fashion:

The group may also face opposition from the incumbent operator Eircom, which would be concerned rivals could not bypass its network in favour of a competing one subsidised by the State.

Looks like someone could start feeling neglected and left out in the cold for being a party pooper

neverhappen

Do you think it's a good idea, that will genuinely address the problems; or that it's a short sighted way of avoiding the real issue of tacking the comms companies?

How do they get broadband to the small towns ?

IMO they only really had two options :

1. Subsidise eircom to enable/upgrade the infrastructure, allowing them to keep ownership, and provide access to it an affordable rate. There were a couple of announcements along these lines in the last year or two. Didn't eircom pull out of one proposed deal in the BMW region cos they werent getting enough dosh? And wasn't Alfie Kane muttering darkly about how it would all have to be "commercially viable' for eircom?

2. Build a new network and bypass the monopoly. Bigger project from govt point-of-view, more expensive, need to assemble their own expertise, etc... But at the end of it, they don't have to give it up to a private company, who, I'd guess, were quoting wild amounts to do option 1 there, cos they reckoned they were the only game in town.

I'd vote for option 2.

It might take more than three years, but imagine having the option of telling eircom to come and take back their leased line, I'm going with the co-op's DSL thanks...

BTW, I don't think its a matter of "tackling" the comms co's on this issue - they have a point in that if its not viable, they can't afford to build it. It comes down to how much the subsidy to build it is. There is still the big issue of tackling the comms co's in the other areas where there is viability (and large profit) from abusing a mono/duopoly ... dsl in cities, no friaco...

Dustaz

The curx of this seems to be that they recognise the main problem - Eircoms monopoly. They have the right idea in retaining half ownership in whatever it is they propose. At least they seem to have learned something.

c0y0te

<merged from new thread - adam>

I spotted this little gem on http://www.enn.ie today... another case of 'dont hold your breath'

c0y0te

___________________________________

The [Irish Times] reports that a high-level government strategy group will recommend a range of new policies to kick-start investment in Internet infrastructure worth up to EUR1 billion. The proposals, which will be brought to government shortly, are based on a vision to make affordable high-speed Internet services available to consumers and businesses within three years

yellum

But they have already invested in broadband a good bit, its their policies on how it should be spent should be reviewed. Theres a broadband network belonging to Eircom idling and I think theres an esat one too that was funded by the Gov.

What could so easily happen is another 2 or 3 broadband rings will get made and still nobody does the whole last mile....

dahamsta

Looks like someone could start feeling neglected and left out in the cold for being a party pooper

It's worse than that Lemming, Eircom could quite easily litigate against the Government, alleging that the Government's actions would damage their business. Whether they win or not would be unimportant, all they would need is an injunction.

adam

Fergus

All this investment in the regions might eventually get everywhere up to something like Dublin 2, where you have nearly every telco in the state with fibre rings running along the road outside your door.. and still your only way to get at it is to install leased circuits. I mean, I wouldn't authorise another cent of tax be spent by the govt unless a specification, price and date is given for when the consumer is going to have affordable flat-rate.

Yoda

Originally posted by Dustaz
The curx of this seems to be that they recognise the main problem - Eircoms monopoly. They have the right idea in retaining half ownership in whatever it is they propose. At least they seem to have learned something.

For once, Dustaz and I are in complete agreement.

Dustaz

Yay

I can go off on my holiday with a warm feeling togetherness and brotherly love:)
(hmm havent checked the broadband thread, better not speak too soon:) )

Xian

I would argue for cautious and conditional support.

Cautious because we are in the middle of an election (refunds for eircom shareholders etc.), and because the proposal is big on ideas and short on detail.

Support because the idea presented has enormous potential. The key to this plan is the ownership of the networks. To do so would be to admit that the mistake of selling off the infrastructure has been made and is irreversible and move on. The problem with investment to date and calls for further investment is that it only serves to bolster the monopoly and service the business market (yes, Dustaz, this must be your day if even I am in agreement with you - maybe you should go on holiday a bit more). State ownership of the network and management by an industry body would serve to open the market to competition and provide for the needs of the community.

Conditional for three reasons:

...based on a vision to make affordable high-speed internet services available to consumers

.
Firstly "affordable". It must be made explicit that the service provided will be flat-rate and unlimited at the chosen bandwidth. That way it would reflect the cost of providing the service.
Secondly "high-speed". Included in this "vision" should be the option of paying for a 28K (or even 15K) connection at a token price if your needs are only for access to e-mail and occasional browsing. Services providing additional bandwidth should be priced as a multiple of this price depending on the bandwidth required up to the level required by businesses.
Lastly "consumer". Change that to "community". The government have to get their heads around the fact that the internet is not some hobby, toy or luxury. It is a necessity, in the same way that terrestrial television and the postal service are necessities. It provides people with the information they need. When the government talks about any of these other services, they do not refer to the users of these services as "consumers" but "the public". The same should be the case when referring to internet access.

As to the possible powers of eircom to have an injunction imposed on the investment

Several technology companies here, including Microsoft, have recently warned Government that local networks are inadequate

If eircom were a power company and did not have the resources or inclination to upgrade their grid to meet growing national needs, putting the economy at risk, would they have the power to prevent State intervention to remedy the problem? I think not.

Typedef

The fact is that governments are quite talented at wasting public monies on grand (mostly populist) schemes and getting very little return for them.

In my opinion it will be the case that even if this proposal is not all just pie in the sky that people won't be able to aford any kind of high speed connection anyway, example adsl, isdn.

Before the government start talking about widening the gap between the 56k masses and adding yet another means for the priveleged few to get 'ostensibly high cost, high speed access', the government should instead be focusing on expanding the number of people with their own internet access and the method people can access it.

Of critical importance is that Irish Joe O'Soap_Citizen_X can get onto the internet for a flat rate. In the UK there are schemes that allow people to have 24/7 56k access (or at least there used to be when I was a Gateway Tech), and that is what Ireland really needs, cheap access for the masses, not some promised future acces in the future that will jump the masses from fairly costly 56k access to low-coast broad band, it's not going to happen that way, logically it can't happen that way if you think about the progression, it is much more logical to make the relatively small progression to 24/7 56k access than it is to suddenly jump x hundred thousand users to 24/7 access at 128,512 kbs or whatever the speed. Simply put get flat rate 56k for the public, heck call it a public service if you must because (it is pretty vital to the emerging Irish high tech economy that we have as many people nationally on board as possible).

Government schemes promising board band for the masses are propaganda to get the techie vote don't be duped, think of how much difference it would make to this country if everyone could have 24/7 56k access cheap... that would not be difficult, nor it be as difficult to implement as some 'future' broad band. Broad band will invariable cost money so if IOLNoLimits cost East so much, what are the realistic chances of cheap broad band for the masses, before cheap 56k for the masses? The 56k infrastructure is already in place and what's more the Irish people paid for that infrastructure, it's ours, and we should not now be in the position where media mogules are dictating to use how we use infrastructure that was paid for with public monies. 56k 24/7, and less of the government and their 'intenet hub'. A hub for who , the few that can actually afford it?

/Internet_Hub phasers to "Yeah right"\

Xian

Originally posted by Typedef
The fact is that governments are quite talented at wasting public monies on grand (mostly populist) schemes and getting very little return for them.

We have to resist the urge to trot out the knee-jerk "another scam by a government as it approaches an election" and evaluate the proposal on its own merits.

In my opinion it will be the case that even if this proposal is not all just pie in the sky that people won't be able to aford any kind of high speed connection anyway, example adsl, isdn.

In my opinion, if the conditions I stated were met, it would do exactly that: give affordable public access to the internet at the bandwidth they required.

Before the government start talking about widening the gap between the 56k masses and adding yet another means for the priveleged few to get 'ostensibly high cost, high speed access', the government should instead be focusing on expanding the number of people with their own internet access and the method people can access it.

Consider, for a minute, admitting defeat in the face of eircom's Liam Lawlor impression. They've won. Suppose there is no reason, business or legal, why they should comply with orders to allow access to the infrastructure we sold them or offer the services we need at a reasonable price. Admit that there is no way, given current metered prices, that people will use the internet. Throw in the towel and say we shouldn't have sold them the infrastructure, being as they are irresponsible with regard to the role they have to play in the development of the economy, but that it cannot be bought back. Where would you go from there? This plan, as ever based on meeting the conditions, gives a possible solution.

Government schemes promising board band for the masses are propaganda to get the techie vote don't be duped

It would be as much a mistake dismissing a valid plan as accepting "propaganda". Would it be possible for the Lobbying Working Group to see if they can contact the Department of the Taoiseach to get clarification and possibly agreement on the conditions before the report is published in a fortnight's time?

Victor

Adam, it smells like something that the government is coming up with late in the day, leaving it to the next government (whatever shape that will take) to implement.

Typedef

For a start one billion euro is not enough to supplant the eircom network with a new national broadband network, it would cost alot more than a billion euro I would imagine.

Secondly why simply abandon the investment in the former state network? The Irish taxpayer paid for it and to say "we" sold it is misleading, the 'government' sold it, because of some PD ideal of the virtues of privatisation and in the process pretty much put a gun to the head of intenet users and just about any telco operation that would seek to use the former state service, now in private hands.

Thirdly the plan is for 'some kind' of development in the future, in three or more likely five years the odtr and eircom will have struck a deal, thus this plan is simply making the government appear e-friendly, because it suits the 'Telfon Taoiseach's' image.

The one billion euro could be set aside right now and with out major infrastructural development (any development really the 56k infrstructure is waiting to be exploited) could be used to supplement a scheme to provide a 'national service' of internet connectivity for the masses, not yet more broad band for big business. Clearly it is in the interests of the IT sector to get as many people access to the internet at the lowest cost to the consumer possible, so as to make the market as flush with consumers as possible, then you start to sell them on line services. Ok I'm not an economist, but this would seem to be simple logic.

As nice as the idea sounds we can't afford to sit around waiting on government red tape to offer real connectivity for the country, if the government are ameniable to putting aside one billion euro, the let them make the monies available right now, set up a fund or agency to implement 24/7 56k access as part of a national service, then watch as every single aspect of IT services, jobs, infrastructures and ancillary attached/spin off employment and machisma literally take off. No longer will people wait for the ODTR to get up off of it's fat pay slip and mystically deliver the holy grail of adsl, clearly even a compromised pricing structre with the odtr and eircom giving ground to each other will price adsl out of the market in real world terms.

Sure adsl would be nice, government sponsored broadband in 5 years would be nice, but in 5 years things in the IT industry will have moved on in monumental terms, it is the fastest moving industry on the planet, even in recession it is a bohemoth. Therefore the quickness the Irish market invests, capitalises the most people possible into this market the more a part of this mechanism we are. Right now the government is saying "Techie things are great just hold on 3 years (maybe) and we will facilitate you". Eh hello 3 years may as well be 30 years in the IT market. Example Gateway Christmas 2000 (talk of making 9 billion dollars for the year 2000), by Febuary 2001 talk of closing Gateway altogether, ergo 3 years is a veritable death scentence for the Irish consumer market, it has to happen now and 56k 24/7 is the most likely way for that to come about.

Don't build yet another national network that simply get filibustered, use the money to free up the infrastructure that 'already' exists, and do it now, not in the middle of the decade.

Fergus

From what little I can tell about this so far, it seems to be a scheme to build out a national all-IP network by bridging from existing backbone to beside local exchanges, so that Internet traffic can be lifted off Eircom at local-loop level and handed over to this IP network build beside the local exchange.

This completely bypasses the need to use Eircom bitstream or carrier services to reach local user's exchange, so no complex and messy interconnect arrangements required for OLOs.

It also makes FRIACO even more feasible, because we don't have to plan for massive upgrading of the voice network to handle exponential dial-up Internet growth, knowing that as this alternate IP network comes onstream, the OLOs will be in a position to offload to it their dial-up traffic as well as replace it with DSL options etc.

In the UK, the FRIACO system is built on the basis that they will need a national IP network like this within a few years to replace it. This could be a masterstroke to get us back up to speed or even ahead of the UK by then, and break Eircom's monopoly at the same time.

As has been said, I reckon the Eircom dirty-tricks dept will be going into overdrive to thwart this one.

Arboration

From what little I can tell about this so far, it seems to be a scheme to build out a national all-IP network by bridging from existing backbone to beside local exchanges, so that Internet traffic can be lifted off Eircom at local-loop level and handed over to this IP network build beside the local exchange.

This completely bypasses the need to use Eircom bitstream or carrier services to reach local user's exchange, so no complex and messy interconnect arrangements required for OLOs.

I hope this is the case, It seems this will jam a foot so far up Eircom's ass that they'll be coughing up the digits which they lose to a system which doesnt rob customers blind, or even if it does but provides a decent ****ing service.

Boston

ive yet to see a post by you that didnt contain a swear, not a good idea.

Arboration

Blame it on the fact that I'm a teenager.

Plus, your subject reguaring my language has nothing to do with this topic.

I was just expressing my anger for this entire country's com system.

Boston

Just some friendly advise, last guy like that was carted away, i think he was called ms