Why not have a 3-tiered system for local calls?

LegacyUser

Just had a thought: why couldn't Eircom introduce a 3-tiered system for local calls? You pay £12 line rental if you wish to pay for local calls, £15 for off-peak unmetered local calls, and finally £20 for 24/7 unmetered local calls. BT has done something similar in the UK already with their Talk Together packages, so I do not see why it would not be possible to do the same here. Of course these plans would not include the cost of an ISP.

PS: I called Eircom net about unmetered 56k Internet access some time ago, and they informed me that it was currently "being tested". Maybe it's just me, but somehow, I don't see what there is to test.

jd

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Urban Weigl:
PS: I called Eircom net about unmetered 56k Internet access some time ago, and they informed me that it was currently "being tested". Maybe it's just me, but somehow, I don't see what there is to test.</font>

There aould be Plenty of stuff to be tested actually-
jd

LegacyUser

teh yallready make 25 pounds from not offering it, why would they change

LegacyUser

Let me rephrase: why couldn't the Irish government take some initiative and force Eircom to offer this service (it would make a welcome change!)? Or the ODTR, if they have enough power (which I doubt).

LegacyUser

because the irish goverment dont have a say over how the private companies run

dahamsta

I agree with your sentiment Urban Wiegl, but I think it should be rephrased it to "a 3-tiered system for data calls". Local calls and data calls shouldn't be confused with each other. The ODTR has supplied numbers to make this possible (at least in one form), and has the ability to supply more.

adam

LegacyUser

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by dahamsta:
I agree with your sentiment Urban Wiegl, but I think it should be rephrased it to "a 3-tiered system for data calls". Local calls and data calls shouldn't be confused with each other. The ODTR has supplied numbers to make this possible (at least in one form), and has the ability to supply more.

adam</font>

dead right.. there has to be distinction between data and voice calls. If people had unmetered voice calls you wouldnt be able to make a call because the exchanges would be jammed all day and night. Do we forget that there are some grannies and mothers out there that can do little else but chat? Giving them free phones would be like giving uzi's to postal workers! (Mayhem would insue).

Plainly put, the ODTR doesnt have enough power. If the government got behind the odtr more and gave its decisions more of a clout then we would see change. Etain Doyle has some good ideas but nothing ever happens because it always seems to be a case of "Right, so we decided on this, now lets just see if the telco's adopt our plans". Most of the time we have seen that this hasnt happened. Thats why irelandoffline is so damn important. No doubt there are people in government thinking "yeah right mabye this is important" or to quote the simpsons - "The screwballs have spoken"

Unfortunately tho we dont live within a government that can affirmatively plan and see a plan to its completion. Its been more of a half-assed approach to the whole telecoms and internet sector that we've all seen lately. I'm sure we'd all like to see Bertie Ahern on TV saying "Yes, our telecoms situation is in termoil and theres not a thing I can do about it" instead of "Ireland is an e-commerce hub".

No doubt someone will disagree with me, so bring it on baby

LegacyUser

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by rymus:
dead right.. there has to be distinction between data and voice calls. If people had unmetered voice calls you wouldnt be able to make a call because the exchanges would be jammed all day and night. Do we forget that there are some grannies and mothers out there that can do little else but chat? Giving them free phones would be like giving uzi's to postal workers! (Mayhem would insue).</font>

I'd like to confirm that I meant all local calls, not just data calls. It works in the US, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and many other countries just fine. The reason for this is because when you're making a local call, you aren't using limited resources -- everyone has their own line, which is just sitting there idle. It doesn't really cost the telco more if it is used more often or less often. That is why charging a fixed flat-rate price for local calls is the only sensible way to go.

In the UK and NI, BT already has a Talk Together plan where you pay £4.99 extra on your line rental for unmetered off-peak local calls. This has not caused any problems.

By saying that "the exchanges would be jammed", you seem to be implying that Ireland's phone network is one of the poorest in the world. I don't agree. Sure, we don't exactly have the best one, but it's certainly not the worst in the world!

[This message has been edited by Urban Weigl (edited 24-07-2001).]

LegacyUser

And I almost forget to mention: not many years ago, Ireland HAD unmetered local calls.

dahamsta

I have to say that although I have the occasional hissy fit about Etain Doyle and the ODTR, it is usually only a hissy fit, and it's usually just a symptom of my unhappiness and anger with her impotence as a Regulator when it comes to certain aspects of her brief. I think Etain Doyle is a good Regulator within the boundaries that have defined around her, but those boundaries are pretty laughable, particularly when it comes to the current problems in the Internet marketplace.

I genuinely find it hard to understand how Ms. Doyle has been so successful in some areas of her brief - mobile/cellular for example, and numbering - but simply seems unable to assert her authority when it comes to the topic that so concerns us here. The Ireland Offline meeting with the ODTR only served to demonstrate this - there was an awful lot of "this is what we've done, now we'll just have to wait and see what happens" rhetoric, and that strikes me as innocent and naive in the extreme.

But of course I know it's neither, because Ms. Doyle has demonstrated admirably in the past that neither of those descriptions can be attributed to her. But even so, there's no excuse for just laying offerings at the doors of large corporations like Eircom and Esat and simply running away. They're by definition enemies, and will invariably be unable to come to an agreement on who makes the tea, never mind something as difficult and complex as unmetered access to the Internet and LLU.

You have to force them together and do whatever it takes to get them to work together, whether that entails offering incentives or threatening punishments. It's up to the Regulator to decide whether to use the carrot or the stick, or even both, but it is up to the Regulator to take charge, and knock heads if necessary. In this case, the Regulator simply isn't doing that, and with that in mind, it seems that Ms. Doyle just doesn't have the power to implement the changes we need, and need now. Which I suppose puts even more of a burden on us to try and force that change.

It begs the question though - is anything being done to correct the current situation? Is the government making any effort to put more power in the Regulator's hands? Is there any consultation within the government on the effectiveness of the ODTR, and how to go about fixing it? If the answer to all of the above is "no", then why not, and how do we set the ball rolling? If the answer is "yes", can anyone explain and clarify what's happening?

adam

[This message has been edited by dahamsta (edited 24-07-2001).]

dahamsta

Hi Urban Weigl,

You're right of course, it's worked that way in the US for years, and it's being introduced in countries that traditionally didn't have it, but your point about the BT offer demonstrates how it works - the cost of the network usage has traditionally been averaged out and added to US citizens bills. It's just another way of going about it, but it amounts to the same thing. Of course, Eircom have ridden it for years, as have BT, and we'll probably end up seeing the same thing here when Eircom really have to start competing.

But there still has to be a difference defined between unmetered local calls and unmetered Internet access. It amounts to the same thing on the face of it, but it's very different in the background, as hudson has explained admirably to us.

FYI, there's been a campaign for years for unmetered local calls in the UK. You may have seen references to CUT here over the past few weeks, the Campaign for Unmetered Telecommunications, which actually started out as a campaign for unmetered local calls, but morphed into an Internet action group. You can see their site here, and slap my **** and call me Judy, but doesn't Ireland Offline gets a mention...

adam

LegacyUser

i thought they disbanded

dahamsta

They did. How does that change the context of my comments?

adam

LegacyUser

no im just wondering since they split just before or just after we formed, why are we mentioned, why are they this updating their site

dahamsta

To keep people informed? I assume they still get a fair number of hits.

adam

LegacyUser

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by dahamsta:
You can see their site here, and slap my **** and call me Judy, but doesn't Ireland Offline gets a mention...
</font>

Eh, I saw us referred to on the front page, linking to this frame:

http://www.unmetered.org.uk/news/news310501.htm

Also, Martin has been in touch with them as well as http://www.telecom.eu.org/

John M.

LegacyUser

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by dahamsta:

You're right of course, it's worked that way in the US for years, and it's being introduced in countries that traditionally didn't have it, but your point about the BT offer demonstrates how it works - the cost of the network usage has traditionally been averaged out and added to US citizens bills. </font>

Maybe it would be useful to look at the US situation for flat-rate local calls, which is different from the newer initiatives in Europe. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can remember local calls have been "unmetered" for 30+ years. Some local telcos offer them free, some for a flat rate of 5 cents per call, etc. The definition of "local" is not necessariyl the same for each local telco. The idea was that business usage and consumer long distance usage should subsidise consumer local usage, that this was for the common good. Keep in mind that the US has NEVER had a state-owned telecoms operator, so the arguments that we can't impact Eircom's way of doing business because they are a private company is just wrong. If a country's legislators/regulators decide on behalf of the people that a government-licensed operator must provide certain services, then it must or get out of the business. Eircom *must* provide emergency 999 services, it *must* provide directory enquiries, etc. It's a condition of their license. I'm starting to waffle here so all stop with this point: those who say you can't force Eircom to offer flat-rate because it is uneconomical or would cost them money are plain wrong. That's what regulators are for.

John M.

LegacyUser

I stand to be corrected, but if eircom introduced a flat-rate service, as part of their licence, they are also obliged to offer that service at a wholesale rate to other interconnected operators so as not discriminate against competitors. eircom have no interest in doing this for consumers or competitors.

eircom retail and network are two seperate entities, for cost and price transparency, non-discriminatory practices, regulatory reasons, and I'm unsure whether they can bundle service packages with access line rental. There has to be a transparent cost (rental) per access line. I don't think eircom would be allowed to offer subidised/discounted line rental to customers based on which services they choose or a volume discount (whereas they can reduce the call charges under these criteria). No more than eircom could discriminate in the cost of renting a 2mb, as they are obliged to provide these in a non-discriminatory, cost-orientated manner.

LegacyUser

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by MyPerfectCousin:
Eh, I saw us referred to on the front page
</font>

"Duh"...."oops"....."Doh!".....etc. etc.