[UK] Bring back monopoly

dahamsta

You need to read the whole story to get the gist of what the writer is suggesting here. The IrelandOffline lifers have covered this a few times and usually tend to come to the same conclusion, but I'd be interested to see what the new breed think.

adam

Guardian Unlimited

The huge telecommunications industry is sinking deeper into a sea of trouble . Hardly a day goes by without a report of a company in difficulty. Yet the communications bill does little or nothing about it.
The appointment of Lord Currie as chairman of Ofcom is a welcome step. He should make a root-and-branch examination of the whole situation.

Many of the difficulties are due to business misjudgments. But there can be no dispute that in Britain, the policy of "facilities-based competition" (FBC) - the construction of physical networks to duplicate that of BT - is a major factor. The cable industry is deeply racked by financial problems; no one knows what its future holds. The biggest single cause is the huge debts that the companies have had to incur to build their competing distribution networks.

It is claimed that the loss of economies of scale due to network duplication is more than offset by competitive pressure on costs and prices. I believe the reverse is true. Customer distribution circuits have always been notoriously under-utilised and duplicating them was bound to make matters worse. Further into the network, the loss of economies of scale decreases as the volume of traffic increases. But you have to get to very big volumes before it disappears.

[...]

captainpat

Adam, Re Guardian item:

This article makes a lot of sense, and is depressing reading. If the U.K., with that paradigm of network competition, the cable network, is in trouble with over-capacity, it could be due to the "dog-in-the-manger" attitude of both media type owners in hugging their unused capacity to themselves and extending at high cost to match and beat the competition. In the short term, the result for the customer is good, but if the infrastructure is weak, what will happen to the network operators, and ultimately, consumer prices?

What is happening to consumer-level services and pricing in the U.S., where the telco giants are in trouble for overextending in many ways? Are the ISPs taking the cost of recovery?

With Eircom owning practically the entire country's network infrastructure, and a regulator with little-known and untested powers, Ireland does not have the competition leverage on the incumbent. They will not need the investment in expansion that other countries experienced. Indeed, as has been said many times, the Status Quo is more than good enough to protect revenues.

So, to ensure a reasonable rate of service provision at reasonable cost means constant pressure from ComReg, who are our substitute for the spurs of competition. Despite the recent successes (?) with FRIACO and Broadband, I am doubtful that ComReg will be able to take charge in the way needed.

The copper and fibre networks are effectively under the control of Eircom, as far as product delivery is concerned. LLU and Bitstream simply licences their resource to another organisation. This should never have been allowed, it's like selling the railway tracks or the roads. We are seeing the altruism and Thatcherite benevolence of the decision now.

It may be too late, but do you think a lobby group to press for re-nationalising the telecom network would be in order? It might be a worthy (wordy ) task for IOFFL to undertake when the first battles have been won.

ON TO THE WAR!!

Moriarty

Similar articles are going to start appearing in irish papers in about 5 years time im sure. I dont want to start repeating what the above article goes into, but i want to make a few points. Ireland is going to come out much worse than the UK - and the rest of europe for that matter - at the end of this. With the market as it is, competition is almost non-existant. The UK has experienced fairly cut-throat competition for the past 6 or more years when you take into account FRIACO and later broadband. Now look where they are. Now imagine how we will be.

The whole point of a regulator and government is that they are aware of what has happened in other countries and dont follow down the same roads that have been shown to be flawed. Perish the thought that they could actually have an original idea; better yet, an original idea that actually enhanced our position over our peers.

I would actually like to have something refering to this in the overall aims of IOFFL, along with affordable flatrate/broadband. Its a more long-term objective than the others, but it could reap the most rewards.

Think of it; an OLO-neutral infrastructure company that actively developed new products to release to a market that was biting at the bit. The infrastructure develops new products/technologys as new revenue stream potential. The OLO's take up these products and sell them to the public. Everyone is on the same side (well, as much as will ever be reasonably possible) and everyone is making a profit.

We would have never had the years upon years of problems trying to get a FRIACO agreement or DSL rollout. We would not have the problems that will crop up as soon as a new technology or product idea raises its head in the future.

What would the comittee think about it? It needs some serious thought..

Richard Barry

This guy is looking backwards! He needs to look to the future...

The same arguments about facilities duplication could apply to any state controlled monopoly that has been privatized. If “supermarket.gov” was privatized there would already be sufficient supermarket capacity in the country. Why build new supermarkets to create competition, etc...?

Telecommunications is going through a structural change involving a move to IP based networks (using this phrase to simplify issue) and this new technology will reduce the incidence of capacity duplication through obsolescence of legacy assets.

xDSL and loop unbundling are the starting point in the process.

Phase 1. DSL takes traffic that is already IP based out of the switched network at the source – i.e. internet connectivity. That is now happening all over the place.

Phase 2. The bitrate of xDSL is increasing to a level where it can offer high quality TV pictures. France Telecom, Telecom Italia and other European incumbents are setting up systems to distribute TV, movies and “radio” over the copper loop into people’s homes. 200 Channels on the France Telecom platform. These versions of DSL can only support a short subscriber line, so the network side of the connection (DSLAM / ASAM (advanced services access manager) will have to be installed in street cabinets. This will allow bandwidths of 50 to 100 Mbits/sec over one or two copper pairs – delivering broadband internet, high definition TV, and other services. The current limit over a 400 metre loop is about 58 Mbits/sec.

Phase 3. Having converted internet access and home entertainment to use the “IP” the next phase will probably be large scale VoIP – i.e. using the same broadband connection for your voice and fax calls. (Assuming fax hasn’t gone the way of telex). The main constraint on VoIP at the moment is the cost and quality of the VoIP hardphones (phones with an RJ45 network plug that goes straight into the network using the same type of connection as one’s PC). The quality issue is now mainly one of network quality (latency – ie delay) – which can be managed.

So we are looking at a combined xDSL modem / “set top box” with ports for your phones and fax, a SCART socket for legacy TVs, one or more USB or firewire sockets for “IP” (MPEG) TVs, a fibre optic connection to your hi-fi system to deliver stereo and movie sound (ie Dolby Digital / DTS) and several RJ45s for IP home networking to connect your home computer(s) to the net. The device might also have a built in firewall and VPN and probably built in 802.11 too! And a smart card reader to control access to the TV and other services subscribed to. (If you have a “holiday cottage” bring the card with you and your subscribed to services are also available there – including your phone number).

At the network end, the traditional exchange building where copper loops converge might well become redundant or find a new role. As will many copper loop segments running between street cabinets and the exchange – unless they are recycled for leased lines or otherwise redeployed.

The street cabinets will probably be fed from a fibre ring running at perhaps 5 or 10 gigabits per sec. Much of the traffic on this ring will be television payload – i.e. the same signals are used by each street cabinet. There is a case for this fibre ring to be owned by a neutral carriers carrier to avoid duplication.

In the residential market, a package of voice, TV and internet services coming down the same copper loop should be economically attractive for both the home owner and the service provider. There is no reason why several SPs can’t compete using proximate fibre fed street cabinets leveraging the legacy copper assets. Similar "IPization" is happening in the business market. In many countries most PABXs now being installed are IP based.

We should end up therefore with a normal market situation where no one supplier has the installed capacity to serve the entire market – as unfortunately is the case with telecom incumbents in many countries that slavishly copied the OFTEL model of privatization!


R.

Moriarty

Originally posted by Richard Barry
<snip!> The street cabinets will probably be fed from a fibre ring running at perhaps 5 or 10 gigabits per sec. Much of the traffic on this ring will be television payload – i.e. the same signals are used by each street cabinet. There is a case for this fibre ring to be owned by a neutral carriers carrier to avoid duplication. <snip!>

Thats all that was being suggested. One company that is carrier neutral, providing the backhaul network across the entire country. They are there soley as backhaul for service providers.

Thinking out loud, this company could even be non-profit, putting the profits made back into the network in terms of infrastructure improvements and R&D. That would also guarentee that the service providers themselves are not being fleeced, hence encouraging more service providers to enter the market, providing more competition - and a better level of service - for joe public. Im guessing that would probably mean some sort of government part-ownership though..

Originally posted by Richard Barry
We should end up therefore with a normal market situation where no one supplier has the installed capacity to serve the entire market – as unfortunately is the case with telecom incumbents in many countries that slavishly copied the OFTEL model of privatization!

This is an honest question: whats the problem with having one supplier (which is properly regulated) having capacity to serve the entire market? Surely it means it has better buying power and improved economies of scale, hence making it cheaper for the service providers and end users?

MagicBusDriver

Monopolies do not work. This has being shown to be true with numerous example in Ireland and Europe. The article in the Guardian is the same leftist rubbish you expect of that paper.

Ardmore

Originally posted by MagicBusDriver
Monopolies do not work. This has being shown to be true with numerous example in Ireland and Europe. The article in the Guardian is the same leftist rubbish you expect of that paper.

Everyone knows that unregulated competition is so much more efficient - just look at the housing market for proof!

(And to keep this just slightly on topic, does anyone know if there's a premium for properties near DSL enabled telephone exchanges :-)

jd

Originally posted by MagicBusDriver
Monopolies do not work. This has being shown to be true with numerous example in Ireland and Europe. The article in the Guardian is the same leftist rubbish you expect of that paper.

I think the point is, to use an anaology, competition between say bus operators would be efficient. It wouldn't be efficient to duplicate road networks..

timod

Originally posted by Ardmore
Everyone knows that unregulated competition is so much more efficient - just look at the housing market for proof!

And just to take it right back off topic again ( sorry mods )


The housing market? I assume you're joking? just ask every tree in North Dublin when I'll be able to afford a house...

Construction and Telco's are like two opposite ends of the spectrum.
(well except the notorious bad planning on both fronts )

You have to have regulation (enforced!) with monopolies. It was different 20 years ago when all the monopolies were owned by the government, and in the public interest.

Moriarty

Originally posted by timod
The housing market? I assume you're joking? just ask every tree in North Dublin when I'll be able to afford a house...

I think it was meant in irony..

dahamsta

You of all people timod.

adam

timod

Originally posted by dahamsta
You of all people timod.

it's late...

Calibos

Originally posted by Moriarty
I think it was meant in irony..

[Nod to dahamsta]You of all people Moriarty should know the difference between irony and what that was ie Sarcasm......or have I just made a fool of myself??:D

Monopolies do not work

Neither does competition in this country. Domestic competition always seems to degenerate into cartelism (is that a real word??:D ) here. When a foreign competitor comes in no matter what part of the business sector its in, they always seems to look at us as a cash cow where they can generate a much greater revenue per customer figure than in their own domestic markets, rather than offering us the same deal as their domestic customers. Why is this? Is there some obscure Irish law that says foreigners can't offer a better deal to us or take a majority market share??? We even have combinations of both!!Esat/EsatBT Esat/O2 Eircell/Vodafone are examples of ex Irish cartel partners now owned by foreign multinationals who seem to be happy with whatever market share they have but must be thrilled with the much greater revenue/Irish customer compared to their British customers.

Ardmore

Originally posted by timod
The housing market? I assume you're joking? just ask every tree in North Dublin when I'll be able to afford a house...

Whooosh!

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Richard Barry
This guy is looking backwards! He needs to look to the future...

The same arguments about facilities duplication could apply to any state controlled monopoly that has been privatized. If “supermarket.gov” was privatized there would already be sufficient supermarket capacity in the country. Why build new supermarkets to create competition, etc...?

Telecommunications is going through a structural change involving a move to IP based networks (using this phrase to simplify issue) and this new technology will reduce the incidence of capacity duplication through obsolescence of legacy assets.

xDSL and loop unbundling are the starting point in the process.

OK, so we have LLU including cabinet level sub-loop unbundling and DSL is now an established technology (not quite in Ireland). What needs to be done to get these other exciting developments?

Richard Barry

Originally posted by SkepticOne
OK, so we have LLU including cabinet level sub-loop unbundling and DSL is now an established technology (not quite in Ireland). What needs to be done to get these other exciting developments?

Evolution rather than revolution.

1. A neutral fibre ring serving street cabinets (to feed them). Can be deployed now and can grow to serve the multi-media demands of the day after tomorrow. Fibre is cheaper to maintain than copper (eg it is impervious to dampness and water ingress – the main cause of breakdowns and low real modem data rates on traditional copper phone lines). It is infinitely scalable in terms of handling new traffic requirements without fresh street digging up, and can often be pulled through existing duct systems when installed for the first time. Once fibre is running to cabinets it can be extended to the home / office as and when necessary.

2. The television distribution phase might begin with a virtual video rental store. This makes the best use of the technology in terms of subscriber convenience compared with using a hard video store and offers a greater choice than is available from a satellite service and doesn’t require a monthly subscription (you pay for what you watch). Certain (surround sound) backstreet satellite operator platforms don’t support Dolby Digital or DTS sound either, which can easily be incorporated in a broadband DSL service. The virtual video store owner is never out of stock of a popular movie when it is first launched. And there is no CO2 or other pollution from motor vehicles on an excursion to the virtual video store.

A largish hard disk server unit (about 2,500 Gb) could hold say 500 DVDs on it with access on demand. A modular set top box with a SCART connector and EPG (program menu selection system) for navigation and selection of a movie or broadcast station. (Modular meaning you can clip on add-on units to the box that provide VoIP phone service, a local hard disk to store videos temporarily, VPN/firewall devices, etc. We have a European standard for STBs (EuroDOCSIS). Needs to be updated for DSL, internet router, firewall, VPN, VoIP, functions using one smart card etc. Broadcast radio and TV stations can be added as well as multi user gaming.

3. VoIP will usually run well provided it gets two things – (a) a phone that doesn’t suffer from internal latency and (b) a network connection that doesn’t suffer from latency for the entire length of the VoIP connection. (a) is available. (b) can be made available by offering low latency priority for VoIP (and similar - eg gaming) traffic on the new network.

4. Finally the regulatory system needs to provide a framework for multi-media DSL. While we might no longer have cable monopolies (assuming the Minister has signed the relevant ODTR papers ending same), it should be as easy and regulation free for you or I to open a virtual video store in any town or city as it would be to open a store with four walls and a roof renting DVDs, and selling ice cream and phone cards, etc. Or to offer a bouquet of local, national and international TV and radio.

We need to get rid of the mental block which appears to exist in some quarters between the operation of telecommunications based business and operating any other type of business. The eircom monopoly asset base needs to be regulated until such time as it's relative position in the Irish telecommunications marketplace is not dissimilar to the position of BMW or Peugeot Citroen or any other individual brand in the car market generally.



R.

spongebob

Originally posted by Richard Barry
Evolution rather than revolution.

1. A neutral fibre ring serving street cabinets (to feed them). Can be deployed now and can grow to serve the multi-media demands of the day after tomorrow. Fibre is cheaper to maintain than copper (eg it is impervious to dampness and water ingress – the main cause of breakdowns and low real modem data rates on traditional copper phone lines).

While the imminent arrival of 3G mobile will work wonders for the CAB (or sub exchange if you will) market I fear that our planning system will perpueate monopoly and not seize this unique opportunity for planning gain.....Galway(County) has decreed that no new house be built within 2k of a Cell mast for example. Once the general population finds out that street cab = mast infrastructure there will be war . Think of the effect on property values if 3G is largely to be deployed in towns, initially.

2. The television distribution phase might begin with a virtual video rental store.
<snip>
A largish hard disk server unit (about 2,500 Gb) could hold say 500 DVDs on it with access on demand.

Left on the side of the road Richard ? I think not somehow. Insurance and all that jazz. If it could be dragged off by an Isuzu Trooper it would probaly never happen.

3. VoIP will usually run well provided it gets two things – (a) a phone that doesn’t suffer from internal latency and (b) a network connection that doesn’t suffer from latency for the entire length of the VoIP connection. (a) is available. (b) can be made available by offering low latency priority for VoIP (and similar - eg gaming) traffic on the new network.

Comreg are not really at the stage where they would mandate that Voice be packetised at the first possible opportunity. It would suit the ESB/ESAT consortium if they win the 3G rollot licence from Hutchison but it would not suit Eircom.

4. Finally the regulatory system needs to provide a framework for multi-media DSL.
<snip>
We need to get rid of the mental block which appears to exist in some quarters between the operation of telecommunications based business and operating any other type of business. The eircom monopoly asset base needs to be regulated until such time as it's relative position in the Irish telecommunications marketplace is not dissimilar to the position of BMW or Peugeot Citroen or any other individual brand in the car market generally.
R.

This is philospohically advanced indeed. You are suggesting that Comreg , a waveform regulator in its current guise , turn into a content agnostic enabler . You'll give them a headache Richard.

At the moment, Comreg run a (limited) licencing regime for systematic local content piracy. These are know as TV deflectors. Until they produce an intellectually rigourous content delivery philosophy allied with an equally rigourous right of the citizen to the requisite bandwith, I fear your integrated approach is a tad ahead of its time.

A decent USO in 2003 that entitles the Citizen to 100kbits+ anywhere in the state (40 times more than at present) would be a Start. 40 times that in another 2 or 3 years gives us 4Mbit .

4Mbits is a Good Start. Now you can go to the VC's for €'s....and show them This

M

MagicBusDriver

A decent USO in 2003 that entitles the Citizen to 100kbits+ anywhere in the state (40 times more than at present) would be a Start. 40 times that in another 2 or 3 years gives us 4Mbit .

4Mbits is a Good Start. Now you can go to the VC's for €'s....and show them This

M

Off topic but what techology can deliver 100k+ to anyone in Ireland at a cost effective price .

maxheadroom

Originally posted by MagicBusDriver
Off topic but what techology can deliver 100k+ to anyone in Ireland at a cost effective price .

Off the top of my head - dual channel ISDN FRIACO.


(I'm assuming that 100k+ = 100kbits+)

Richard Barry

Originally posted by Muck
2. The television distribution phase might begin with a virtual video rental store.
<snip>
A largish hard disk server unit (about 2,500 Gb) could hold say 500 DVDs on it with access on demand.

Left on the side of the road Richard ? I think not somehow. Insurance and all that jazz. If it could be dragged off by an Isuzu Trooper it would probaly never happen.

No No No! Please read in conjunction with my earlier posting. The neutral DWDM fibre ring brings the entertainment feed from street cabinet to street cabinet (along with everything else).

I would also point out that the thread is in response to a rather clueless item which appeared in "The Guardian" newspaper.

If you have driven in Barcelona you may have come across the "Diagonal" (boulevard). Eighteen double palm tree lined lanes in places running from the ring road in the north east to the ring road in the south west through the downtown area. (ie the equivalent in Dublin terms of an 18 lane boulevard running from the M50 near Killiney (not yet built!) through the city centre and out to the M50 at Blanchardstown). Computer controlled tidal flow (eg 10 or more lanes into town in the morning with only 8 out and the reverse in the evening) with rolling green waves (in each direction) allowing one to cross the city (2 x Dublin pop) with only 2 or 3 red lights in about 10-12 minutes. Lined by elegant boutiques, the boulevard is carrying probably twice as much traffic as the ugly motorways that intersect cities like Birmingham.

It took farsighted planning over the decades to achieve this. Something we need now today in the telecommunications environment in Ireland! (not to mention public transport, etc).

R.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Richard Barry
If you have driven in Barcelona you may have come across the "Diagonal" (boulevard). Eighteen double palm tree lined lanes in places running from the ring road in the north east to the ring road in the south west through the downtown area. (ie the equivalent in Dublin terms of an 18 lane boulevard running from the M50 near Killiney (not yet built!) through the city centre and out to the M50 at Blanchardstown). Computer controlled tidal flow (eg 10 or more lanes into town in the morning with only 8 out and the reverse in the evening) with rolling green waves (in each direction) allowing one to cross the city (2 x Dublin pop) with only 2 or 3 red lights in about 10-12 minutes. Lined by elegant boutiques, the boulevard is carrying probably twice as much traffic as the ugly motorways that intersect cities like Birmingham.

It took farsighted planning over the decades to achieve this. Something we need now today in the telecommunications environment in Ireland! (not to mention public transport, etc).

OK, so you see the Government intervening in a very substantial way and actually implementing (possibly via PPP schemes like the town MANs), a new telecommunications infrastructure based on IP? I might have taken you up wrong, but I'm curious as to how you see this being done.

Richard Barry

Originally posted by Muck
While the imminent arrival of 3G mobile will work wonders for the CAB (or sub exchange if you will) market I fear that our planning system will perpueate monopoly and not seize this unique opportunity for planning gain.....Galway(County) has decreed that no new house be built within 2k of a Cell mast for example. Once the general population finds out that street cab = mast infrastructure there will be war . Think of the effect on property values if 3G is largely to be deployed in towns, initially.

Do street cabinets currently have lots of planning problems? There is nothing to stop them being installed on private property (eg bottom of a garden or inside a railing) with the owners permission.

Co Galway will either get new houses or new 3G cellsites but surely can’t have both with a 2km rule. They can always move to using two way paging and only send text messages – requiring much less bandwidth and far fewer cellsites than even 2G.

Comreg are not really at the stage where they would mandate that Voice be packetised at the first possible opportunity. It would suit the ESB/ESAT consortium if they win the 3G rollot licence from Hutchison but it would not suit Eircom.

I wasn't suggesting that ComReg mandate VoIP - it will fall into place in time as competitors unbundle to offer other services over IP. See original posting.

4Mbits is a Good Start. Now you can go to the VC's for €'s....and show them

>>>>4Mbits is a Good Start. Now you can go to the VC's for €'s....and show them ....

ETSI are a bit slow off the starting blocks on this one – given that several continental incumbents are already working on these services.

Look at the bottom! ETSI’s PR agency uses an AOL e-mail account!

R.

http://www.etsi.org/frameset/home.htm?/pressroom/Previous/2002/NGN_workshop_after.htm

spongebob

Originally posted by Richard Barry
Do street cabinets currently have lots of planning problems? There is nothing to stop them being installed on private property (eg bottom of a garden or inside a railing) with the owners permission.

A Cab on its own would be no problem, if it is a trojan horse for a Microwave Transmitter then I think not Richard....somehow. If you can cleanly decouple them then I agree absolutely and would volunteer a chunk of me own front garden for the common good....anytime.

I am correct in saying that the entire impetus behind the installation of dispersed fibre cabs is coming from 3G rollout and not from a desire to fix up the network ....despite the fact that it is the most expensive network in Europe as measured by line rental. Non?

Co Galway will either get new houses or new 3G cellsites but surely can’t have both with a 2km rule. They can always move to using two way paging and only send text messages – requiring much less bandwidth and far fewer cellsites than even 2G.

This is what the 'planning' system appears to have overlooked. They also allow raw sewage discharges beside Blue Flag Beaches in the interest of 'proper planning and development' as they so quaintly put it but lets not get intoi a discussion on those muppets.

Look at the bottom! ETSI’s PR agency uses an AOL e-mail account!

Lets not get hung up on the technical abilities of PR Bunnies...:D
I simply wanted to show that your view of new generation networks is at the discussion stage by the relevant standards body.

M

Richard Barry

Originally posted by SkepticOne
OK, so you see the Government intervening in a very substantial way and actually implementing (possibly via PPP schemes like the town MANs), a new telecommunications infrastructure based on IP? I might have taken you up wrong, but I'm curious as to how you see this being done.

One hears of government funded fibre of one sort and another and one wonders where it is going? Is it being used in the best way? How much of it is dark and will remain so? What pathway should it follow in the urban ring environment?

We have loop unbundling and are moving to street cabinet DSLAMS. If “you” are currently paying €50 for DSL internet and €35 for cable or satellite TV and €50 for eircom landline services and €20 for video rental (pm) you have €155 of monthly buying power potential for DSL deliverable services.

If you use the same infrastructural pipeline to bring all these services to your home it must be more economic all round – delivering a more interesting market in terms of competitive opportunity – and hopefully a lower cost and better service as a result. Similar benefits in the business market.

It doesn’t require a massive government investment a la S.Korea. It does suggest the need for a more strategically thought through use of the current fibre money. Fibre is one resource that won’t become obsolete and the closer it runs to the end user’s premises the better. Street cabinets are surely a good compromise at this stage (rather than exchanges – which are out of range of most NGN services in terms of xDSL delivery). The alternative of running fibre from exchanges to people’s homes at a later stage would be much more expensive and disruptive. The traditional telephone exchange after all is a one to many relationship whereas the IP network ring is just that – like a railway line that serves a dozen towns along its route.


R.

Richard Barry

Originally posted by Muck
A Cab on its own would be no problem, if it is a trojan horse for a Microwave Transmitter then I think not Richard....somehow. If you can cleanly decouple them then I agree absolutely and would volunteer a chunk of me own front garden for the common good....anytime.

I am correct in saying that the entire impetus behind the installation of dispersed fibre cabs is coming from 3G rollout and not from a desire to fix up the network ....despite the fact that it is the most expensive network in Europe as measured by line rental. Non?

There is no role for a microwave transmitter in the model I am discussing. Fibre to the cabinet. Copper to the customer - replaced later by fibre to the door.

In the final analysis I suspect that 3G will require a lot less cellsites than people think. The frequecies involved are only a little higher than 1.800 MHz GSM. The people who think that there will be zillions of gigabytes of traffic moving around the 3G networks are probably the same suckers that signed cheques for EUR 100bn for 3G license fees.

Hands off our street cabinets!

R.

spongebob

Originally posted by Richard Barry

In the final analysis I suspect that 3G will require a lot less cellsites than people think.

Time will tell but they must roll out before they know for sure. Launch by December 2003 being the first significant milestone in Ireland. The next is "Class A licence will involve a roll out requirement on a phased basis of a minimum of 53% of the population (all 5 major cities) by mid 2004" . Ask me in a year and a half

Hands off our street cabinets!

Hear Hear. Make them flat on top so they can be used as bird tables in winter. I need one 'a dem in the garden.

M