ComReg replied, we are doomed (apparently)

Urban Weigl

I emailed ComReg about the introduction of an affordable flat-rate offering about a week ago, and received a reply this afternoon:

"The role of this office is to ensure the development of a level playing field that will foster the growth of competition across all areas of the telecommunications sector ..... The introduction of product offerings on these codes [flat-rate 1893] is a matter for service providers..."

So who is in charge of keeping Ireland competitive on this matter, not to mention protecting the consumer? Apparently nobody, because I also called the competition authority, and they said that this was in ComReg's hands. So unless the mandate of ComReg is extended to the following points, Ireland will remain the e-Tub of The World (at this stage):

1. Protecting the consumer, and;
2. Ensuring that Ireland's telecommunications systems and prices are on-par with the rest of the developed world by having the ability to mandate new offerings

pork99

change the name & packaging, from ODTR to Comreg, makes it look as though something is being done when its still the SOS (Same Old Sh1t) - not a good omen

all talk no action!

spongebob

did ya ask them how they protect the consumer other than with an out of date universal service obligation?

why have they not brought in USO obligations for local monopolies such as cable companies?

mobile, is there a USO for Vodafone?

M

Dustaz

Eh, this is hardly a surprise.


The minister has said they have the power. The ODTR has always maintained that they dont. In one months time, they will submit thier proposals in view of the directive and THEN we shall find out if they actually want to make a difference or not (i.e., they should then outline what powers they need to carry out the mandate)

BoneCollector

Yeah.. i seem to remember someone telling me i was ranting
Here! and then i confirmed my rantings Here!

The minister has said they have the power. The ODTR has always maintained that they dont. In one months time, they will submit thier proposals in view of the directive and THEN we shall find out if they actually want to make a difference or not (i.e., they should then outline what powers they need to carry out the mandate)

You Wish! (I`ll give you €100 if this happens)

Your reinterpreting the directive to suit what you would like it to mean. This guy was a solicitor and the directive is worded very clearly as not to lay any responsibility on his doorstep and does not lay out any plan whatsoever.

Hannibal_12

Hardly surprising. I'm sure the RAT isn't at all worried about flatrate for the immediate future and reading that reply seems to confirm their apathy is justified.
I'll wait and see if it (flatrate) actually materialises at all and as for broadband I don’t see any huge change in pricing on that front. Maybe I'm overly pessimistic but I believe as long as €ircon have everyone by the balls then not much is going to change in Ireland in the near future.

PiE

This country is run by morons.

Let's start a revolution, then we can send in the army to physically take back what is rightfully ours. It's the only way anything will be done.

Hannibal_12

Originally posted by PiE
This country is run by morons.

Let's start a revolution, then we can send in the army to physically take back what is rightfully ours. It's the only way anything will be done.

Agreed. Lets start the industrial revolution since it obviously never happened in Ireland the first time. It's really sad/pathetic that one company in the year (nearly) 2003 can effectively hijack a countries infrastructure. Its equally pathetic that in (nearly) 2003 there is still no available, affordable broadband by either DSL or cable when some former soviet block countries are using it along with some developing countries for a fraction of the cost here (if your one of the lucky 2000).
Needs to be big changes and quick or Bertie & Co can use that broadband plan for toilet paper since it wont be much good for anything else.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Urban Weigl
"The role of this office is to ensure the development of a level playing field that will foster the growth of competition across all areas of the telecommunications sector ..... The introduction of product offerings on these codes [flat-rate 1893] is a matter for service providers..."

What has the number 1893 got to do with the actual provision of flat-rate? I'd be quite happy to dial up under any prefix. The problem is that flat-rate is not feasible without an appropriate wholesale service. Without this wholesale service , the existance of a prefix is irrelevant. Backwards thinking like this a big part of the problem I think.

Calibos

I just love it when the whole 'Competition' thing is trotted out. I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that there is something unique about the Irish market/consumer/mentality/leaders/businesses etc that means competition just doesn't work here. In every area that we are overcharged, ie insurance, telecoms, banking etc we were promised that competition would force change and reduce prices. All these foreign institutions would come in and show the Irish dominant players what competition really means. B*ll*x!!:mad:

Take that Scottish bank that opened for business here a few years ago. I can't remember what area's it undercut the Irish banks in. They thing was though they undercut by enough of a margin to tempt customers away from the Irish rip-off merchants but were still charging us multiples of what their British customers were paying. The Irish banks reacted by matching the Bank of Scotland which wasn't much of a financial hardship. Rather than this precipitating a price war to the benefit of us, the scottish bank decided they had poached enough customers thank you very much. Sure doesn't the higher revenue per customer mean that each Irish customer is worth 3 British ones to them. Happy Days!!:rolleyes: These companies entering into 'competition' in the different area's of the Irish markets were quite happy to maintain the status quo. Any 'rocking of the boat' they did was more like a light swaying! Rather than try and take a significant share in the Irish markets by charging fair prices like they charge their domestic customers they decide to try and tempt a smaller number of prospective Irish customers with slight price reductions while generating a much higher revenue per customer than they can in their own markets. Is it because they know the Irish consumer is very docile, that we just accept our lot. I think so!

BoneCollector

Competition!?? (what competition!?)
Ireland does not have telecomunicaitions competition.

The definition of competion is that you compete against your competitor to provide the same service.
Here in backward Ireland the Competitor is the same person you must purchase from before you compete!?
this is not compettiton, this is reselling

THERE IS NO COMPETITION!
1 SUPPLIER (Erscum)
MANY RESELLERS

stormkeeper

Hrm... I really wonder about the ComReg...

Dustaz

Originally posted by BoneCollector

THERE IS NO COMPETITION!
1 SUPPLIER (Erscum)
MANY RESELLERS

While i agree that there isnt any real competion in the telecom sector, you have to conced that EsatBT are not a reseller of Broadband services.

They unfortunatly suffer from the same greed Calibos described in his post. They COULD be charging a LOT less for their DSL but they insist on using this mythical "huge co-location fee" to justify the price on thier dsl (which is co-incidentally almost the same price as Eircom, as Calibos pointed out so subtly )

De Rebel

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I think it is fair to say that the original purpose of the regulator was to ensure fair competition in the market place, and ensure that the incumbent did not block entry to the market. To that extent, regulation was intended form the outset to be somewhat "passive".

It was never the case that the regulator was intended to be the proactive champion of new services.

[OT] In reality, the reason for having a regulator is no longer valid ( a regulator was required because the dept of communications was previously both regulator and the major shareholder in Eircom) Once this situation changed, the office should have been abolished and the function moved back into the DCMNR. [/OT]

The impetus for change can only come from 3 sources (1) the "competitors" - ESAT is effectively in a cartel arrangement with Eircom, and no other competitor is strong enough. (2) The consumer - Ireland has a pathetic record in consumer driven initiatives - in fact IOFFL is probably one of the more successful examples (3) The Minister - setting policy for the country and getting it implemented is the job of the Executive (Government//Minister).

At present it appears that 2 & 3 working together is the combination most likely to product results. Endlessly calling Etain Doyle and her office names will get us nowhere. Constructively lobbying the Minister just might advance the cause.

MDR

First off, I would point out that this is the standard line that COMREG fires out when it recieves those type of queries. I wouldn't be suprised at all if they had a templated letter. I would try wandering down the road that Muck (ah, where would we all be without him) advocated and attempt to attack COMREG's USO service oblidgations.

[aside] Muck, I am a bit rusty on this. The abiliy of COMREG to require USO service obligation was part of an EC directive. From my understanding, EC directives are transposed into Irish Law, the USO serivce obligation formed part of the Comm's Act 2002, which setup COMREG. Therefore COMREG has power to require USO's to provide certain services, minimun bandwidth (28,8 kpbs) etc ... could you flesh it out a little for me please [aside]

De Rebel, also makes some very good points however I disagree that ESAT BT and Eircom are completely in cahoots ... , especially in light of the ongoing FRIACO negotiations (which from what we hear are quite advanced at this stage). I would readily agree however that ESAT BT, is benefiting in its own way from a less than fair market, but there still is a measure of competition out there.

I am more inclined to attack to Irish Consumer, who has a woeful, and I mean absolutely woeful, track history when it comes to looking after the pennies. Peeps in general love to attack the govt. for this type of thing (they do have to bear some responsiblity) , but I feel (personal opinion alert) that they are personally more responable.

It gladden's my heart that IOFFL exists, that finally people are standing up for themselves and their consumer rights. Ain't no-one gonna do this for us peeps, we want it, we gotta go get it. So I give ' Urban Weigl' an IOFFL silver star on his homework, now go back to the COMREG and more importantily DoC with the points that Muck made and bang at their door.

spongebob

Originally posted by MDR

[aside] Muck, I am a bit rusty on this. The abiliy of COMREG to require USO service obligation was part of an EC directive. From my understanding, EC directives are transposed into Irish Law, the USO serivce obligation formed part of the Comm's Act 2002, which setup COMREG. Therefore COMREG has power to require USO's to provide certain services, minimun bandwidth (28,8 kpbs) etc ... could you flesh it out a little for me please [aside]

REGWHOP , the Regulator Who Has No Power is divvied into 5 divisions internally. There is a Market division which is suppsed to deal with FRIACO. Consumer Affairs is part of this and not a division in its own right.

The European Framework also comes in 5 parts. Consumer Rights is an equal part of this ...unlike the subservient role it plays within REGWHOP

Oftel have a good 'Wassup with the Directives' page at this Location unlike the REGWHOP site where a virtual excavation leads to .....nothing as it happens.

The Framework contains a (fairlyy readable) USO directive... known as the Universal Services Directive...as a directive it is LAW here in Mid 2003 whether REGWHOP thinks so or not. In this document the committment to 28800 speeds over analog lines is explicit.
Here is the directive ( 200k ) and the 28800 bit is on page 2 Article 8 ....(they actually say 56k in the directive but explain it as 28800 elsewhere).

Article 4 , 2 on page 9 defines 'functional Intenet access, taking into account prevailing technologies' as a basic consumer Right, like air and water and stuff lads. ADSL prevails in the EU so we are entitled to it here as well unless REGWHOP thinks that 'prevail' is a kind of puréed duck thats out of season most of the year ?

There is some funky stuff on Leased lines.....which is what any always on product is....non?

Friaco show up in page 10, article 8 section 2.

Unless REGWHOP is taking the piss or something...I have not entirely discounted the possibility......, it must update its Risible USO in order to take the new LAW into account as soon as the Directive is active here. At the moment they have not even published a draft USO for comment and submission etc etc etc.

WHY?

M

dahamsta

Speaking of USO's, I know that the data USO is 9,600 baud, but hasn't there been mention here before of a higher USO for fax?

adam

spongebob

Dream On Adam. 9600 ya boy ya who told ya that ?

When was this Document updated by REGWHOP and why were you keeping it secret from us. Page 5 has the offending item.

The EU said this today of FRIACO in their annual Telecoms Report this morning. Sorry about the word doc....easier t
o cutnpaste than pdf.

FRIACO
There are widely differing views as to the usefulness of providing flat rate interconnection for narrowband internet access. Some regulators consider it likely to encourage broadband take-up by accustoming users to flat-rate retail access, while others believe that it has now been overtaken by DSL (high speed digital subscriber line technology). At any event, flat rate interconnection must be offered to new entrants on a non-discriminatory basis by incumbents where they offer their own retail flat rate narrowband internet access to their customers. To allow market entry, it is particularly important that the FRIACO contract does not contain network architecture requirements which cannot be fulfilled by the majority of new entrants. It is also important that FRIACO is offered by the incumbent at levels of interconnection demanded by new entrants. This means that the non-discrimination principle needs to be applied not in a purely formal way but taking account of its underlying objective, which is to open up the market.

Thats a finger out then
REGWHOP innit!

The EU Commission sez there are MANY ways to do it but the basic premise is the underlying objective .....that being the opening of the market.

M

MDR

At any event, flat rate interconnection must be offered to new entrants on a non-discriminatory basis by incumbents where they offer their own retail flat rate narrowband internet access to their customers.

therefore, because Eircom's retail end doesn't offer FRIACO they aren't oblidged to offer a wholesale product ...

spongebob

Correct Ray.

But is it inimical to the 'opening up' of the 'market'

There are 2 considerations really! Had we widespread Broadband then FRIACO would not be necessary as a mechanism to open up the market.

As €ircon know this chicken/egg sh1t already I will explain the important bit for our slow learning REGWHOP droids who pick up useful pointers towards reality in here....on occasion....if we're lucky..

If 500,000 lines in Ireland ..out of 1,700,000 could get Broadband 'in the morning' then FRIACO would still be necessary ....but marginally so....to 'open up' the Market.

Eircom want us all to believe that the Market is Open for a prevailing technlogy such as ADSL. It isn't because of Geography and Eircoms really really bad wiring and the fact that 3G rollouts are a year away...no matter what the marketing bunnies say in their full page ads.

Eircom have an Unregistered Database into which their Line Tests are put, I see REGWHOP shows no interest in this database because REGWHOP has NO POWER when it comes to Data Protection .....in its blinkered worldview.

The true National picture is ...at best....... 170,000 capable lines out of 1,700,000 with both decent enough wiring AND proximity to a DSL enabled exchange and a corresponding entry on that Database.

FRIACO over Analogue is therefore a Vital interim technology to 'open up' the market while Eircom fixes its copper according to the USO directive which is Law by July 2003 and the Copper management agreement.

Then we can all get our Statutory 5Mbit by March 2005 as promised by FF.

M

SkepticOne

Originally posted by MDR
therefore, because Eircom's retail end doesn't offer FRIACO they aren't oblidged to offer a wholesale product ...

The paragraph is saying that if Eircom, for example, offered a retail flat-rate service, then they must offer a wholesale one. This does not imply the converse, i.e., if Eircom don't offer a retail flat-rate service, then they can't be made to offer a wholesale one.

The paragraph also says that some regulators feel that flat-rate has been overtaken by DSL and is therefore not important. Hardly true in Ireland. If the EU had a problem with mandating a wholesale service in the absence of a retail one, then they would have singled out those countries that have successfully achieved this.

MDR

Muck

Forgive me if I am confused, your weaving a little bit ..

But is it inimical to the 'opening up' of the 'market'

No arguement here, but is there a legal requirement, or does COMREG etc have power to issue a legal requirement on them to provide a FRIACO wholesale product. With all the hot air being blown about the Comms Act, Various EU Directives and the colour of Etain Doyles socks, are we coming down to the fact that COMREG's powers are still only to force despute resolution.

Had we widespread Broadband then FRIACO would not be necessary as a mechanism to open up the market.

I don't know wether thats true, me thinks that FRIACO will always be necessary to allow consumers to 'step up' to broadband. Their will always be a certain percentage of peeps who will see it at their mate's house and sign up straight away. But I think broadband demand/dependance is something that needs to be nurtured by FRIACO.

The true National picture is ...at best....... 170,000 capable lines out of 1,700,000 with both decent enough wiring AND proximity to a DSL enabled exchange and a corresponding entry on that Database.

I have heard these figures being bandied about for quite some time, from source I know and respect, I have to admit I am still a little bit sceptical ... where is the definitive quotable source providing the figures ?

Must sign off ...

spongebob

The overall thrust of the paragraph is that REGULATORS, thru their ACTIONS make MARKETS work in an OPEN way.

Our clapped out nag won't get into the starting gate.

De Rebel

Muck

I agree with all of the facts you present and found the links you provided today very interesting. In particular the EU Telecoms report, often without trying, shows just how bad our situation is.

I am interested in teasing out your last assertion; you appear to contend that it is the regulator’s role to open up the market, and to be proactive about it. I understood the regulator to have a more reactive role, and that the impetus for change was expected to come from elsewhere. At the time the legislation was drafted it was reasonable to expect that the incoming Telcos would provide the impetus for change. The context has changed and with it their appetite. In reality this leaves the Minister as the only one who can take the National interest and the interests of consumers on board and drive the change that is required. Am I wrong?

I ask this not for the sake of an academic argument, but because I believe that the answer to this is key to the success of IOFFL’s objectives. We must understand who is best positioned and most likely to assist us in achieving our objectives and focus our energies in that direction.

In many ways I think we are reaching the same conclusion by two different routes: the regulator isn’t going to make it happen. To which I say "let’s move on and find someone who will"

zynaps

Originally posted by Muck
Article 4 , 2 on page 9 defines 'functional Intenet access, taking into account prevailing technologies' as a basic consumer Right, like air and water and stuff lads.

Well, if we look at the current situation and ask "do we have functional internet access", I guess we do have functional access... like we'd have functional air if we had to buy it for a euro per 1 litre plastic bag.

But not exactly functional by way of "prevailing technologies"... so shouldn't COMREG be obliged to DO something about this lack of functionality?

Eircom are the incumbent, and they're nonfunctional.
Can we just have their lines seized or something and taken over by the government (or some educated, fair-minded borg employed by the government in a non-profit organisation)?

If net access is supposed to be functional with respect to current technology and a right for consumers, why is our telecommunications in the hands of eircom, when the government wouldn't let our water supply be controlled by someone travelling round with a bucket of it charging by the pint?

zynaps

spongebob

yes zynaps

a regulator who thinks 2400 Kbit (0.3k) is a sufficient universal service nowadays needs to be pointed in the direction of reality IMO

by the 'reactive' logic the ODTR would deem asses and carts to constitute public transport along after the internal combustion engine made its debut.

They would be right of course but we would end up getting nowhere slowly....which brings us to 2001 and the worst universal data provisioning in the OECD.

De Rebel asked

I am interested in teasing out your last assertion; you appear to contend that it is the regulator’s role to open up the market, and to be proactive about it.

I say that it is Amongst her roles to do so. I then pointed pointed out a particluar legal framework that sez she HAS to do something coz its her job in the sense that she protects the consumer thru Universal Service Obligations.

By the way its high time she hit Voodoofone with a 2G USO as well, but thats another story. USO designations may only be applied to those in a monopolistic or near monopolistic position.

M

Calibos

by the 'reactive' logic the ODTR would deem asses and carts to constitute public transport along after the internal combustion engine made its debut.

The asses and carts analogy is a good one. The domestic Irish 'ass and cart' manufacturers have being over-charging us for decades. They got away with it because we needed an 'ass and cart' to get around and thus had to buy one regardless of the cost. The ass and cart buying public could only look across the water with envy at those sasanachs with their new fangled 'cars'. We asked the ass and cart manufacturers if they would start making cars instead. They said no, that they didn't know how to make 'cars'. In reality they knew well how to make 'cars' but they realised that because there were no sasanach 'car' manufacturers in Ireland that we might buy from instead of them, that they had us with our trousers down over a barrell of guinness. Sure couldn't they get away charging 'car' prices for cheap to produce 'ass and carts'. The ass and cart regulator couldn't do anything cause neither of the Irish ass and cart manufacturers made a complaint about the other one. Then eventually the 'ass and cart' market was opened up by the free state government. The sasanach 'car' manufacturers moved over to Ireland and we all thought,"jaysus, sure thats great, we can all buy cars now from these sasanachs and feck our shower of gobshee's." Our delight was shortlived when we realised that the sasanachs weren't going to make cars for us either. They were going to make 'ass and cart's' instead and charge us slightly less than the Irish ass and cart manufacturers.

Ahhhhhhh Feck!!!!

eircomtribunal

Originally posted by Muck
If 500,000 lines in Ireland ..out of 1,700,000 could get Broadband 'in the morning' then FRIACO would still be necessary ....but marginally so....to 'open up' the Market.

The true National picture is ...at best....... 170,000 capable lines out of 1,700,000 with both decent enough wiring AND proximity to a DSL enabled exchange and a corresponding entry on that Database.
M

While it is not important whether there are a meagre 500 000 lines dsl enabled or even only 170 000, I would like to know the true figures.
Eircom have told me on the phone and on request per email that they do really have 500 000: "In response to your first query, I can confirm that the 500,000 lines as advertised are not just the amount of lines attached to DSL enabled exchanges, but are the amount of lines capable of carrying DSL.")

How to find out for sure?

Peter

Lex_Diamonds

Would people call me paranoid if I put forward the theory that Comreg et al are sitting in Eircon's pockets? With such obscene profits being generated by Eircon and this Governments track record, it is very likely (in my opinion) that they are being paid to "go easy" on Eircon.

After all, a politican in power will usually look to the near future and their own profit rather than the long term view and how competition can help this country.

Calibos

Would people call me paranoid if I put forward the theory that Comreg et al are sitting in Eircon's pockets? With such obscene profits being generated by Eircon and this Governments track record, it is very likely (in my opinion) that they are being paid to "go easy" on Eircon.

I wouldn't call you paranoid at all m8. It wouldn't suprise me at all. Eircom dont want to give up the per minute charging that netted them €500 from me on my last bill and I'm sure Charlie McCreevy was happy with his share of €100 in VAT.

spongebob

Originally posted by eircomtribunal
"In response to your first query, I can confirm that the 500,000 lines as advertised are not just the amount of lines attached to DSL enabled exchanges, but are the amount of lines capable of carrying DSL.")

How to find out for sure?

Peter

The details are on this mysterious DSL line test Database. No such database is registered with the Data Protection Registrar. It may not even exist, being a new field on your normal account database in Eircom. On the database the success rate is apparently now around a third hence 170,000 out of 500,000 . It was 20% in the first series of iterations of the line tests.

There is no way that 500,000 lines are hooked up to EIRCOM DSL enabled exchanges in Ireland. Nor to Eircom and ESAT enabled exchanges together .

M