Dermot Ahern Is Blatantly Lying Again .....jeez!

spongebob

In December 2002 Dermot Ahern Said the Government would be spending €83 Million on this fibre ring project. Here is what he said after the rumour went out that the South Eastern ring would be delayed to 2004 .

Today he announced that he would be spending €65 Million on the project. In LESS than 2 months he has cut back the planned expenditure on the 19 town fibre rings project by €18 Million and delayed much of it until next year apparently.

You are such a BAD LIAR Dermot. When will the FRIACO directive Actually have effect ........now that your consultation on it finished a month ago today? Is FRIACO a legally and duly mandated policy objective or did that shrink too by 25% or so in less than 2 months as well. ?

iwb

The SouthEast rings are definately delayed. Apparently they will go out to tender AGAIN later this year. All this work was already but will be done twice I guess. It really is a shame.

spongebob

Mary O'Rourke announced 67 Towns would get fibre rings in March 2002 , during the first 2 phases of her brilliant 5Mbit for everyone ahhhhh shure why not plan.

Phase 1 ,

19 Towns

(Not Including Waterford,Wexford,Clonmel,Kilkenny,Carlow until 2004 at the earliest)

= 14 Towns really I suppose. By the way , most of them have DSL already ....

Waterford, (has DSL)
Wexford
Carlow
Clonmel, (has dsl and cable)
Kilkenny, (has dsl and cable)
Cork(has dsl)
Shannon/Limerick (have DSL / Shannon unlit western digital corridor))
Galway(has dsl and unlit western digital corridor)
Athlone(has dsl Jan and unlit western digital corridor)
Mullingar(has dsl Jan and unlit western digital corridor)
Carrick-on-Shannon
Manorhamilton
Gaoth Dobhair(unlit fibre ring)
Roscommon
Port Laoise(has dsl)
Letterkenny
Tullamore
Ballina(has dsl)


Phase 2

48 Towns

This will not start before 01/01/2005 which is the earliest posible completion date for Phase 1. As cabling 19 towns will take 2 years, these extra 48 Towns will will take 5 years to provision with their very own local authority Fibre rings. Dublin is included in phase 2.

Buncrana
Ballyshannon
Donegal
Dundalk
Drogheda
Ardee
Monaghan
Carrickmacross
Sligo
Dublin
Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown
Naas
Newbridge
Kildare
Athy
Navan
Arklow
Wicklow
Portarlington
Longford
Birr
Edenderry
Ennis
Thurles
Nenagh
Roscrea
Carrick-on-Suir
Tipperary
Cashel
Dungarvan
Enniscorthy
New Ross
Gorey
Cork City
Mallow
Youghal
Fermoy
Charleville
Tralee
Killarney
Listowel
Ballinasloe
Tuam
Loughrea
Gort
Castlebar
Westport
Claremorris


Phase 3

This Phase will not start before 01/01/2010 - which is the earliest possible completion date for Phase 2. There are no specific plans to Cable any of the following towns as they did not make Phases 1 or 2. A list of towns which may blip onto the Radar in 2010 was actually published in March 2002 when the original 67 were announced. The exclusions were.

Leixlip
Celbridge
Kilcullen
Kilcock
Monasterevan
Maynooth
Clane
Kildare
Ashbourne
Dunboyne
Trim
Kells
Duleek
Dunshaughlin
Bray
Blessington
Newtownmountkennedy
Kilcoole
Greystones
Mountmellick
Clara
Kilrush
Newmarket-on-Fergus
Newcastle West
Rathkeale
Templemore
Muine Bheag (Bagenalstown)
Tullow
Thomastown
Cahir
Tramore
Macroom
Carrigaline
Mitchelstown
Kinsale
Bantry
Midleton
Bandon
Clonakilty
Kanturk
Skibbereen
Cobh
Passage West
Blarney
Castleisland
Dingle
Carndonagh
Bundoran
Athenry
Boyle
Castlerea

You should all contact the DCMNR and tell them to get the finger out really.

M

Praetorian

Ehh n1. Balbriggan (population 15,000-20,000)

Might be an idea to do some big towns. Makes sense though...the biggest business park in the coutry is being built at Balbriggan apparently...sure what would they want the net for

sceptre

Some of those "phase 2" (sounds like the name of a dodgy nightclub) towns already have DSL as well. Esat certainly offer it in Mallow. Obviously not using the fibre ring but well, they already have DSL so they probably don't care.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Muck
This will not start before 01/01/2005 which is the earliest posible completion date for Phase 1. As cabling 19 towns will take 2 years, these extra 48 Towns will will take 5 years to provision with their very own local authority Fibre rings. Dublin is included in phase 2.

Is this based on the assumption that a fixed amount of manpower will be available to do each phase (e.g., if 19 towns take X amount of time, then 48 will take 2.5X)?

spongebob

I assume the prioritisation and funding will remain linear, or sub linear.

In Mary O'Rourkes original speech, all 3 phases were due for completion "within 5 years". That means March 2007. Dermot won't even complete phase 2 by then. Phase 1 was supposed to be finished THIS year.

From Biddys Speech, given less than a year ago. She was quite speciific.

The first phase is being conducted in association with local and regional authorities which will receive 90% funding from the Exchequer. A total of €44 million is already allocated this year in the Department of Public Enterprise vote for the project, which should be completed in full next year at a full cost of €60 million.

Phase two will witness the expansion of broadband networks in the remaining 48 towns. This will be completed through a Public Private Partnership and involve a total investment of another €100 million. Phase two should be completed within three years.

Phase three will involve rolling out the programme to cover all 123 towns in the State with a population of 1,500 or over and the target date for completion is five years.

Thanks Dermot

M

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Muck
In Mary O'Rourkes original speech, all 3 phases were due for completion "within 5 years". That means March 2007. Dermot won't even complete phase 2 by then. Phase 1 was supposed to be finished THIS year.

I think 2010 is possibly optimistic. I think it is more likely that Eircom will convince DCMNR that such fibre is unnecessary since they have fibre running through most of the country and such issues as telecommunications are best left with the incumbent telephone company who can be subsidised to do the same work.

I would not be surprised if Eircom's 54 euro DSL is dependent on DCMNR dropping all this fibre ring nonsense, particularly if they want to see it rolled out beyond the current DSL enabled areas.

Hornet

The risk for the fibre rings is in my opinion less Eircom's antics and attempts to influence the plans, instead it is more the financing.

The fibre ring project was from day one a totally unrealistic dream. The paint will come off over the next few years and in 5 years the whole plan will have fallen apart.

When the plan emerged it was in my opinion for very straight forward "How can I build a monument for myself?"-reasons. - The Mary (O'Rourke) Net, instead of the Bertie Bowl.

We have to accept that Ireland is economically divided and no fibre ring or DSL will solve that problem. Despite all the attempts of IDA and Enterprise Ireland, most companies coming to Ireland would prefer to locate themselves near to Dublin. Donegal, West Cork and many other areas are infrastructurally too remote.

The fibre rings are an attempt to overcome the economical divide by solving the digital divide. This concept can work if the majority of jobs in the non-city areas are IT related jobs and if the skill set available in these areas is a strong IT skill set. Whereever that is NOT the case, the economical divide will never be solved with a few hundred kilometres of fibre.

I would compare the fibre rings (telecoms infrastructure) to a different type of infrastructure: Would anybody seriously suggest to build a motorway to Gweedore or to Tuam or to Bandon?? They are all on the list for fibre rings! If the concept of a motorway to Bandon is totally unthinkable, why would the fibre ring concept make more sense?

Would a company that currently would stay away from Bandon really be attracted to the place just because there is a fibre ring?

Yes, affordable high-bandwidth data services are an absolute requirement in Ireland, but do they need to be available everywhere?

I could go further in the operational issues the fibre rings will bring with them, but I will leave that for another day.

Just let me ask a few questions: Why would a fibre ring drive down the cost for services significantly? For a long time, all alternate carriers that came into the Irish market were very happy with Eircom's high price policy. It gave them a chance to charge high prices (just below Eircom's) as well. Were would others see the incentive to offer services if they have this mindset? Yes, new companies would have a chance to offer services for a lower price, but keep in mind that if these new companies can get access to low priced fibre, Eircom would have the right to get access for the same price! Does that now create a level playing field? ...and there are many many more issues...

Stonemason

Firstly i go and try (in vain)to download cs 1.6 and read this

It's important to note that due to how Steam 2.0 works, it will only be available to those on broadband connections. CS 1.6 final will work with a 56k modem, though.

A sign of the times 56k is an afterthought already!! much like Ireland is rapidly becoming.

Then muck realy cheers me up with his post about phase 2 being completed by 2010 which with this line (below)just made me cry.

This will be completed through a Public Private Partnership and involve a total investment of another €100 million

Let me take you on a journey into the distant future RTE news 4 years from now new gover-mental guy says when asked about Broadband rollout.Well we were ready to go into partnership with the private sector but we couldnt find any as they had all left because there wasnt any broadband.

?????? Soz this was suposed to be on the Dermot Ahern Is Blatantly Lying Again .....jeez! thread huuum

spongebob

thats not what the minister said about his first ring when he opened it PR Guff from Dermie Here it will bring , social inclusion, fast cheap net access, and show "willingness to embrace"

The rings will be connected to that other mythic construct that Biddy mentioned time and again, I've never seen it myself but it MUST be out there....somewhere.

Yes, Dermot mentioned the national Broadband Backbone again.

M

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Hornet
The risk for the fibre rings is in my opinion less Eircom's antics and attempts to influence the plans, instead it is more the financing.

Maybe. Nevertheless, they are being fiercely opposed by both Eircom and Esat.

We have to accept that Ireland is economically divided and no fibre ring or DSL will solve that problem. Despite all the attempts of IDA and Enterprise Ireland, most companies coming to Ireland would prefer to locate themselves near to Dublin. Donegal, West Cork and many other areas are infrastructurally too remote.

The fibre rings are an attempt to overcome the economical divide by solving the digital divide. This concept can work if the majority of jobs in the non-city areas are IT related jobs and if the skill set available in these areas is a strong IT skill set. Whereever that is NOT the case, the economical divide will never be solved with a few hundred kilometres of fibre.

I would not agree entirely that it is about enabling IT related jobs outside of cities. Agri-business firms like Glanbia rely on modern communications for example, linking databases across multiple sites. Any vaguely modern business is going to need high speed communications if it is going to succeed. After Mary O Rourke announced the extension of the "National Broadband Network" (now part of Eircom) to Donegal, a firm in Donegal was quoted a five year lead time on a leased line. This is the sort of thing that is motivating the fibre rings. I've no doubt that many inward investing companies probably want to locate in or near Dublin, but some of them may decide otherwise. Any that get the runaround from either Eircom or Esat will simply turn around and leave. Even low tech manufacturing industries five years ago might have made do with substandard communications, but not now. Now they need to link their production systems together to provide continuous reporting.

I agree that fibre alone can't solve major economic divides, though.

Would a company that currently would stay away from Bandon really be attracted to the place just because there is a fibre ring?

I don't think anyone would be arguing that telecommunications would be the sole reason for a company to locate anywhere. It can only be a factor. I can think of many reasons that a company might not want to locate in Dublin, though.

Yes, affordable high-bandwidth data services are an absolute requirement in Ireland, but do they need to be available everywhere?

I would agree that the first priority should be towns where such services are most likely to make a difference, and move outwards from there.

Just let me ask a few questions: Why would a fibre ring drive down the cost for services significantly? For a long time, all alternate carriers that came into the Irish market were very happy with Eircom's high price policy. It gave them a chance to charge high prices (just below Eircom's) as well. Were would others see the incentive to offer services if they have this mindset? Yes, new companies would have a chance to offer services for a lower price, but keep in mind that if these new companies can get access to low priced fibre, Eircom would have the right to get access for the same price! Does that now create a level playing field?

But if a company can switch between Eircom and Esat and the Esb's network, this forces those networks to compete. Agragated demand on the ring provides the incentive for them to connect. No single company can dominate since each is only allowed a maximum of 40%. If a new telco wants to connect, they connect to the ring, not to each and every company in the town. In this way it promotes competition which is why Eircom may be opposing it. That and the fact that the money is not going into their pocket. I think Eircom's announcement to extend DSL and provide a cut down cheaper version is largely in response to the threat of this project. That and the imposition of FRIACO and the little bit of competition Esat is providing with their own DSL.

These are the positive aspects as I see them. I have problems with the riings too. Lack of kerb side access points and other last mile issues. To get the full benefit from them there will need to be funding for alternative last mile methods like wireless if the full benefit is to be realised.

I also take the point that there may be some towns that won't get any real economic benefit because they are too small or too remote for companies to locate to. In the unlikely event that the project reaches them, then these last mile issues will be even more important.

zynaps

Considering phase three of this plan (if I'm reading this right) will not be completed at the earliest till 2015, do yis think it might be a not so great idea to plan too much in the long term for a technological thing?

Considering Japan has 12mbit ADSL now, where do ye think the rest of the world will be in 12 years when we finally (if the plan works to the letter, in the timescale that's been prescribed - and we have only seen failure in a big way to make this happen so far) unveil our 5mbit wonder...?
I hear that fibre is scalable (if that's the right word) and can last well, but I dunno. Do you?

zynaps

Hornet

Originally posted by SkepticOne
I would not agree entirely that it is about enabling IT related jobs outside of cities. Agri-business firms like Glanbia rely on modern communications for example, linking databases across multiple sites. Any vaguely modern business is going to need high speed communications if it is going to succeed.

I accept that point. But the same type of firms would benefit from motorways to their production locations and they will never get it. Don't get me wrong, I am not questioning the advantages of high-speed communications to these companies. But I wonder if such a high-cost project is justifiable for the few companies that need it.

After Mary O Rourke announced the extension of the "National Broadband Network" (now part of Eircom) to Donegal, a firm in Donegal was quoted a five year lead time on a leased line.

On one hand you could say: Outrageous! On the other hand, try this: Forget for a moment that it is Eircom, but assume it is your company. You are measured by the profit you make. The cost to provide a leased line to a (potentially) remote area in Donegal could far outstrip the revenue you will ever generate. Would you be keen to provide it?

I read a lot of articles on this board about Eircom's impossible and unacceptable attitude to providing low priced services or to provide services per se in the first place. Very often people seem to think that Eircom should be nice to their customers, helpful and cheap. This is nonsense. In NO way I am trying to defend Eircom, but let's face it: They are a ruthless, profit oriented company who is using their monopoly position without any hesitation. Hey, that sounds like the Irish Supermarket mafia, or the petrol industry or ... O.k. they might not be monopolies, but they are oligopolies.

Eircom (or EsatBT for that matter) feel absolutely NO social obligation of "helping" people when it comes to selling their services. If Eircom wouldn't have been State owned, we would probably not be surprised and that's where we come to the crucial point. Our money and our parents money (tax) was used to build the company and therefore we expect a social consciousness.

Unfortunately none of the governments managed to turn P&T or Telecom Eireann in a properly working company WITH social obligations and after all failed, Mary O'Rourke et al. decided that Eircom should be rewarded for all the bad service they provided and in the context of the privatisation, they are allowed to keep everything and "screw" the tax payer a second time.

The privatisation would have been the time to unbundle parts of exchanges, to unbundle the copper AND (no-one is talking about that) to unbundle the ducts or even the FIBRE!!!! We don't need additional fibre rings, Eircom has more than enough duct and the deployment of fibre in exisiting duct would cost nothing in comparison to building separate networks.

I've no doubt that many inward investing companies probably want to locate in or near Dublin, but some of them may decide otherwise. Any that get the runaround from either Eircom or Esat will simply turn around and leave. Even low tech manufacturing industries five years ago might have made do with substandard communications, but not now. Now they need to link their production systems together to provide continuous reporting.

Does it justify the cost of the fibre rings? I have to apologise for my non-social stance on that, but I have the feeling issues in Ireland are sometimes "over-socialised": Should we really spend our taxes on equipping Gweedore and Bandon with a telecoms infrastructure of a large city? If I want to work for, let's say, Microsoft. Microsoft would tell me that I have to come to Sandyford. They won't come to whereever I chose to live. Why don't we equip Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway and maybe another three or for large cities with a 1st class telecoms infrastructure and forget about the rest? Sounds brutal, I agree, but does that not make a lot more sense?

I would agree that the first priority should be towns where such services are most likely to make a difference, and move outwards from there.

I totally agree!

But if a company can switch between Eircom and Esat and the Esb's network, this forces those networks to compete.

I won't enter into the whole discussion about _proper_competition. This posting is already getting too long. But compare the prices the three you mentioned are charging for managed services. You will probably find out that they compete as much as Tesco and Dunnes compete. It is only a superficial competition. Nobody wants to destroy the high-price model we have in Ireland. We need companies that "rock the boat"!

Agragated demand on the ring provides the incentive for them to connect. No single company can dominate since each is only allowed a maximum of 40%. If a new telco wants to connect, they connect to the ring, not to each and every company in the town. In this way it promotes competition which is why Eircom may be opposing it. That and the fact that the money is not going into their pocket.

No discussion: Competition is necessary to break the monopoly/oligopoly, but let's use the existing (taxpayer financed) infrastructure first and make it available to Eircom's competitors, before we spend millions more.

These are the positive aspects as I see them. I have problems with the riings too. Lack of kerb side access points and other last mile issues. To get the full benefit from them there will need to be funding for alternative last mile methods like wireless if the full benefit is to be realised.

That's where we disagree: In my opinion NOBODY should get any funding for providing data services! Instead unbundle the infrastructure fully from the lowest possible level (duct). Only then you have proper competition. Yes, you risk that Bandon won't get a Terabit network, but I was talking about that aspect before. (BTW: Providing phone services is a different story. I think the Universal Service Obligation (USO) should stay there and should be supported with funding.)

I also take the point that there may be some towns that won't get any real economic benefit because they are too small or too remote for companies to locate to. In the unlikely event that the project reaches them, then these last mile issues will be even more important.

I totally agree on the fist part. The second part is solved by "my" FULL unbundling concept.

Ronan|Raven

Originally posted by Muck
Phase 3

This Phase will not start before 01/01/2010 - which is the earliest possible completion date for Phase 2.

Castlerea


M

Ah great only 8 years to wait sure thats no time at all I will go put on the kettle....

spongebob

Originally posted by Hornet
Instead unbundle the infrastructure fully from the lowest possible level (duct). Only then you have proper competition.

I think the Universal Service Obligation (USO) should stay there and should be supported with funding.)

I was wondering when all this would appear on the horizon.

In March 2002, a WEEK before Biddy promised us her nutritional supplements (fibre rings) there was another government report dealing with the final mile. This was the holistic version of Biddys plan.

Much of the responsibility for the final mile is with the ferret like Martin Cullen as minister for the Environment. He must issue guidelines to local authorities. These find their way into County Development Plans. The ferret like Martin Cullen has done nothing of the sort.

Many County Development Plans are being FINALISED at the moment and will take us up to 2008. They will not include any intelligent provisions like mandating builders on new estates to hand over ducting to the local authority who would let Eircom SHARE it ....of course.

Our venaland corrupt Local Authority Planners are too stupid to add reasonable guidelines off their own bat.

Therefore there will be no provision for Ducting to be taken out of the hand of Eircom until 2007 - 2008 when the NEXT lot of County Development Plans and their associated Area Plans are being formulated.

The ferret like Martin Cullen has much to answer for in not transposing the following passeges from the Report into Guidelines from his Department to Local Authorities, the Planners have to follow those you see Martin.

The Working Party Report is Here

The ferret like Martin Cullen was supposed to have organised Recommendation 58 (page 22) through the Planning Process by Now so that

Ducting ..provided as part of new infrastructure build

and Most Tellingly that

There is a Common Set of Local Authority Guidelines for the Installation of Telecommunications Infrastructure to ensure consistency, transparency and certainty

and then

the draft ducting guidelines prepared by the Department of (Ahern) in cousultation with the department of (The ferret like Martin Cullen) and Local Authorities Are Adopted as a National Standard.

When will you give us the

consistency, transparency and certainty

then Martin ?

Recommendation 60 (p23) makes it clear that and unambigous in a way that even The ferret like Martin Cullen can understand

The Terms of ANY future planning permission should make it obligatory for the developer to lay ducting and transfer it to the Local Authority when building urban roads, housing and industrial estates.

So thats where the final mile is at..............nowhere

Another year wasted.

The USO will of course be vital, have you submitted yet Hornet ?

M

Hornet

Couldn't agree more with Muck!

It's easy for Local Authorities to COMPLAIN and to ask for more money. But when they finally have the chance to DO something, they suddenly get shell-shocked (sp?).

Maybe IrelandOffline should not only lobby Dermot Ahern, but as well Martin Cullen (and others).

-Hornet

spongebob

Thanks to the Ferret like Martin Cullen, there will be no South Eastern Fibre and there will be nothing to connect into it when it does arrive, late.

Did the Ferret like Martin Cullen ensure that there would be ducting alongside the large Waterford ByPass Project launched a few weeks back?

In re ducting in Waterford where the Ferret like Martin Cullen has particular responsibility !

What does the Waterford County Development Plan say
What does the Waterford City Development Plan say
What does the Dungarvan Area Development Plan say

Has ANY Builder in Waterford been asked to provision a duct and hand it over to the Corpo/Council yet. Why not? Did the planners not read the report from the Taoiseachs department ? Did the planners and roads engineers not realise the importance of ducting ?

And YET, both Waterford and Dungarvan are suposed to get their fibre rings next year (maybe); thanks in large part to the Ferret like Martin Cullen and his unrivalled vision for the future of Waterford of course.

Get away

M

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Hornet
On one hand you could say: Outrageous! On the other hand, try this: Forget for a moment that it is Eircom, but assume it is your company. You are measured by the profit you make. The cost to provide a leased line to a (potentially) remote area in Donegal could far outstrip the revenue you will ever generate. Would you be keen to provide it?

That's why Eircom have a Broadband FWPMA license, for the specific purpose of overcoming the infrastructural limitations of copper/fibre.

I live 7km from Ballina. The cost of providing a leased line over fibre or copper would be ridiculous, but I could (theoretically) have a 2Mbit IP service over the air in the morning.

Stonemason

I know what your saying but there are several points you seem to think is quite normal,Which are not.

Very often people seem to think that Eircom should be nice to their customers, helpful and cheap

Any business that has a monoply like eircon can afford to treat its customers this way everyone else has to work hard to have good customer relations.This is not normal in most countries

Eircom (or EsatBT for that matter) feel absolutely NO social obligation of "helping" people when it comes to selling their services. If Eircom wouldn't have been State owned, we would probably not be surprised and that's where we come to the crucial point. Our money and our parents money (tax) was used to build the company and therefore we expect a social consciousness

Of course this is very anoying to alot of us but it goes well beyond that to use your motorway anology what if there were only one road builder in the country and that company decided that because it owns the roads we should all pay tolls to use them then say those tolls were so exspensive that only a select few could afford to use them and we the poorer types had to pay for maintanace of said roads through road taxes leveled at us by our own goverment add to this the cost of living starts to go up because frieght is so expensive.The point being the goverment wouldnt stand for it (unless they were paid enough)and neither would the public and though some people beleive that the internet is a toy it is fast becoming the rest of the worlds way of doing business.IT is extremely important for the future growth and well being of the irish economy and ireland is being held to ransom by a private company.So in affect not only has Eircon benefited from money paid by your father and his father but they are now tring to rob you and your children and your childrens children.I dont expect eircon to have a social obligation as i didnt vote for them but i do expect our elected goverment to do what we pay them very very well to do Protect our intrests.

Hornet

Originally posted by oscarBravo
That's why Eircom have a Broadband FWPMA license, for the specific purpose of overcoming the infrastructural limitations of copper/fibre.

I live 7km from Ballina. The cost of providing a leased line over fibre or copper would be ridiculous, but I could (theoretically) have a 2Mbit IP service over the air in the morning.

If it is only 2 Mbit/s you require, it would potentially even be possible to provide this over the copper you already have in your house.

But your point was a different one:
You are right, you could have that over-the-air link in in no time, IF there would be a FWPMA base station within reach. If there is no base station, some business case has to be made for it. With a sufficient amount of customers for an over the air link around the base station, you could have a chance. If the critical customer mass is not there, you have no chance.

Like it or not, a profit oriented company has no interest in investing in you as a SINGLE customer if there is no other revenue opportunity.

So bottom line: You are absolutely right, but it comes back to the social conscious of a profit oriented company. There is no such thing!

I know it's tough and I don't expect that other readers on this board would agree with me, but we do live in a capitalistic society and deal with capitalistic (= profit oriented) companies.

I don't know your exact situation, but you would have to ask yourself if a (government sponsored) fibre ring in Ballina and subsequently a number of other carriers offering services in Ballina would really change the situation for you. Probably not, if you are still a single customer, 7 km away from the fibre ring!

-Hornet

spongebob

Hornet

This thread discusses Eircoms licence requirements in GREAT detail ....all the most recent stuff .... and Oscarbravo has LOS to a FWPMA Narrowband Basestation 7KM away ......

at least 19% of the population are supposed to have access to FWPMA Wireless RIGHT NOW.....but there is no Map so we don't know which 19% has it. Comreg have not made Eircom publish one.

Would YOU fancy ringing a Biddy about it , gwan ya good thing.

M

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Hornet
I

But your point was a different one:
You are right, you could have that over-the-air link in in no time, IF there would be a FWPMA base station within reach. If there is no base station, some business case has to be made for it. With a sufficient amount of customers for an over the air link around the base station, you could have a chance. If the critical customer mass is not there, you have no chance.

How then is he getting the signal? The have the equipment, they are just not providing the service.

Hornet

Originally posted by Stonemason
I know what your saying but there are several points you seem to think is quite normal,Which are not.

> Very often people seem to think that Eircom should be
> nice to their customers, helpful and cheap.

Any business that has a monoply like eircon can afford to treat its customers this way everyone else has to work hard to have good customer relations.This is not normal in most countries.

But that is the point. They DO have a monopoly and this monopoly situation has been sanctioned by the government over years. So they just behave accordingly.

I agree with everybody who complains about Eircom and I have many many complains about them myself and am encountering their monopoly position on a daily basis. But I am not _surprised_ about it and I don't expect Eircom to change.

What I do hope for (eternal optimist!) is STRONG regulation and government support for competiton. (The opposite of what Muck described in his posting about the lack of Local Authority support for competitors.)

Of course this is very anoying to alot of us but it goes well beyond that to use your motorway anology what if there were only one road builder in the country and that company decided that because it owns the roads we should all pay tolls to use them then say those tolls were so exspensive that only a select few could afford to use them

I like how you further develop the motorway analogy! But I see it a bit different. My motorway analogy is not the question should we have streets at all or not. It is based on the assumption that streets are there and provided as a basic service. But if you want a BETTER service you have to pay. So if you want a country road to Gweedore, it should be provided and payed for through taxpayers money. However, if you want a motorway you have to pay the toll. A Universal Service Obligation (USO) is the guarantee for a (VERY) basic road system. Everything above has to be payed for by the user. You don't HAVE to use the motorway, but if you CHOOSE to use it you will be charged for it. Yes, you are right, it could be that only a select few can use these motorways or that some can only travel a certain distance (lower bandwidth) on the motorway.

and we the poorer types had to pay for maintanace of said roads through road taxes leveled at us by our own goverment add to this the cost of living starts to go up because frieght is so expensive.

Through taxes the poorer types don't have to pay for the maintenance of the motorways, but only the maintenance of the basic roads.

The point being the goverment wouldnt stand for it (unless they were paid enough)and neither would the public and though some people beleive that the internet is a toy it is fast becoming the rest of the worlds way of doing business.

Well, if you follow the discussions about tolls on Irish roads, the government is EXACTLY doing what you say they wouldn't support! And the public is supporting it by using the toll roads.
If you use the basic roads (with detours or through towns that slow you down) you don't pay toll. If you want the upgraded road version, you DO pay.
Roads have been the way of doing business for years. And still 90% (or so) of Ireland survice without motorways despite delays and traffic jams.

I still think the motorway analogy is quite fitting.

IT is extremely important for the future growth and well being of the irish economy and ireland is being held to ransom by a private company.So in affect not only has Eircon benefited from money paid by your father and his father but they are now tring to rob you and your children and your childrens children.I dont expect eircon to have a social obligation as i didnt vote for them but i do expect our elected goverment to do what we pay them very very well to do Protect our intrests.

We agree on most aspects here. IT is extremely important and Ireland is dependent on a private company. But who turned this company into a private company??? The GOVERNMENT!! So in a way the government who you/we elected robbed us and sold this so important asset off. So the government did NOT protect your interests. It's like being killed by the murderer who you bought the knife for!!

I am not against privatisation of state owned companies, but look at the ESB example. Here it is done properly: The infrastructure is grouped out and made available to the previous monopoly AND to the new competitors. A privatisation would not be possible for the infrastructure part. That's what should have happened to Telecom Eireann!

-Hornet

Hornet

Originally posted by Muck
at least 19% of the population are supposed to have access to FWPMA Wireless RIGHT NOW.....but there is no Map so we don't know which 19% has it. Comreg have not made Eircom publish one.

Would YOU fancy ringing a Biddy about it , gwan ya good thing.

M

As part of the licence conditions and as part of the merketing concept, Eircom is not allowed to and not interested in selling FWPMA as a separate service. Instead it is seen as an enabling technology. So through this method, Eircom circumvents the publication of coverage maps and I would expect that ComReg would not have much leverage here.

Call it a nasty trick, call it cleverness, I leave that to you. There is ONE advantage for the end user. If Eircom would sell it as a separate service, they would try to charge MORE than for the standard leased lines. (Unfortunately FWPMA - at least the broadband version - is quite expensive to deliver.)

Did somebody contact ComReg about a coverage map? Would it really help you to have one? (Keeping in mind, that Eircom can still CHOOSE to provide services to you or not.) If somebody can explain how it would help/change things, I would definitely actively support approaching ComReg about it.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Hornet
I agree with everybody who complains about Eircom and I have many many complains about them myself and am encountering their monopoly position on a daily basis. But I am not _surprised_ about it and I don't expect Eircom to change.

The buck stops with the Government as far as I'm concerned. There will always be areas that Eircom being a monopolistic company with no social responsibility (nobody is surprised at this) will find uneconomical.

I gave the example of a company in Letterkenny who was quoted a five year lead time for a leased line. Of course I am not surprised at this. They need to concentrate their resources in Dublin where there is some competition, otherwise Colt or Via or some other company will get the business. The company in Letterkenny can wait.

I used this example to illustrate that despite a government investment in fibre in the area, Eircom have no compulsion to use it.

Because of the area, it is probably not economical for other telcos to extend their network to Donegal. Consequently, if you believe that Donegal should have advanced telecommunications, State intervention with vendor neutral infrastructure is part of the answer.

Your suggestion of unbundling other aspects of Eircom's infrastructure is also interesting. There would need to be new legislation enacted and this could take time. The existing LLU regulations came from Europe and it is unlikely that they will go further.

If however you believe that Donegal should not have such telecommunications or that the social advantages does not justify the cost to the tax payer, then that is another issue.[/B][/QUOTE]

Hornet

Originally posted by SkepticOne
How then is he getting the signal? The have the equipment, they are just not providing the service.

The question is if they have the equipment INSTALLED in Ballina. It is no use to have a Base Station in Cork (or in a warehouse destined for another location with the requirement customer density).

Eircom have the licence, have bought equipment and have quite a number of base stations installed. The licence however, only talks about a percentage coverage, NOT about how many customers actually have to be serviced in the covered area. (Could be seen as a loophole.)

BTW: Esat has a licence as well and Chorus still has a licence. Do we know something about their coverage?

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Hornet
The question is if they have the equipment INSTALLED in Ballina. It is no use to have a Base Station in Cork (or in a warehouse destined for another location with the requirement customer density).

I'll repeat the question. How is he currently getting the signal if the base station is in Cork?

Hornet

Originally posted by SkepticOne
The buck stops with the Government as far as I'm concerned. There will always be areas that Eircom being a monopolistic company with no social responsibility (nobody is surprised at this) will find uneconomical.

I gave the example of a company in Letterkenny who was quoted a five year lead time for a leased line. Of course I am not surprised at this. They need to concentrate their resources in Dublin where there is some competition, otherwise Colt or Via or some other company will get the business. The company in Letterkenny can wait.

I used this example to illustrate that despite a government investment in fibre in the area, Eircom have no compulsion to use it.
[/B]

Agreed. The company in Letterkenny is just ONE company with a relatively small revenue opportunity in comparison to the cost. Unfortunately this situation would not be different for a competitor. Unless the competitor gets the fibre for free, he still needs to invest a certain amount of money to provide services to this company in Letterkenny. If they take a 34+ Mbit/s link, you would find a number of interested providers. For a 1 Mbit/s link (or even less), you won't.

Because of the area, it is probably not economical for other telcos to extend their network to Donegal. Consequently, if you believe that Donegal should have advanced telecommunications, State intervention with vendor neutral infrastructure is part of the answer.

Yes, PART of the answer. No business case would fly for a lower bandwidth leased line as described above.

There is an interesting real life situation.

Nevada tele.com (now Energis) is known to have a large bandwidth link to Carrick-on-Shannon (I might be wrong about the name of the place, but it is not too relevant) to a call centre there. The link from Dublin was partly (maybe even: largely) government funded. As soon as they were able to offer services to there, Eircom lost the race due to higher prices. As a result, competiton gave the end customer a better price and displaced Eircom. Great! That's what competiton should be all about.

But let's look at the next chapter of this story:

If - God forbid - Eircom WOULD lower their prices for leased lines, Energis could loose the contract. This is still what competiton should be. However, if Eircom would win back the contract, all the government funding would be wasted. This was NOT the intention of such a funded project. So that's the first problem. The second problem is that Carrick-on-Shannon has ONE single customer that justifies a (funded) link like that. Yes, you can pick up some small leased lines while you are there, but not a lot. Even funding would not create full competiton. We would have a duopoly and Energis would leave the prices high enough but just below Eircom.

Totally different situation if it would be an area with high customer density! But that brings me back to my argument AGAINST new expensive fibre rings in areas with no real revenue opportunity. (I could mention Gweedore and Bandon again, but I would like to stress that they are just two examples of many other villages on the fibre ring list that don't make sense.)

Your suggestion of unbundling other aspects of Eircom's infrastructure is also interesting. There would need to be new legislation enacted and this could take time. The existing LLU regulations came from Europe and it is unlikely that they will go further.

It would take a lot of time and might legally not even be possible, I accept that. But if we look to the future, I would like to refer back to Muck's contribution about the Local Authorities opportunity to make sure that from now on, the mistakes of the past won't be repeated. They are clearly NOT taking this opportunity.

If however you believe that Donegal should not have such telecommunications or that the social advantages does not justify the cost to the tax payer, then that is another issue.

It is indeed another issue, but a very close one in a discussion about fibre rings.

I don't expect too many readers here to share my opinion, but I do not think Donegal should have such telecommunications infrastructure. I am coming back to my motorway analogy: In my opinion streets are required to/in/around Donegal, but not motorways.

Over time this can change IF commercially there is a justification for it, but I haven't heard about plans to build a motorway to Donegal. I guess the reason is that nobody could commercially justify it.

--Hornet

spongebob

My precise point is this.

19% of the population can get ISDN or ADSL @ 384k from a FWPMA Base Station. Thats because they have line of sight to an EXISTING basestation. 31% of the population will have this alternative by June 2005

The customers are entitled to the SAME LEVELS of customer care from Eircom over wirelsss that they are over wired, its in the licence.

Logically this means that where Eircom cannot supply ISDN over Wired ...distance and crap lines are the usual suspects, AND THEY HAVE WIRELESS AVAILABLE , they should immediately offer it over Wireless.

The resaon they got the spectrum in the late 1990's land grab was to enable them to offer Narrowband products over an alternative final mile loop to Copper.

Eircom make sure that their staff are blissfully ignorant of where the Wireless alternative is currently available....hardly consistent with their licencing obligation to be platform agnostic where they have coverage.

Example

1. If you were ....say.....5 miles (8 km) out of Cork on top of a hill.
2. You can see a large Eircom tower in the City (it probably has FWPMA capability)
3. You have been refused ISDN because of distance over copper.
4. You should then be offered the ISDN service over Wireless instead. All they need to do is to put a box in your attic.
5. If you want ADSL later....same distance problem...the port on the FWPMA antennae can be reconfigured in software.
6. Reconfiguring the box in the attic will take 1 minute (Interface swap)
7. Presto, ADSL...albeit at 384k over Wireless.

The current system is like pulling hens teeth.

a) Nobody knows where the Antennae are.
b) Nobody in Eircom is allowed to admit to knowing where they are.
c) Eircom customer care is not offering the service...you must hound them
d) Comreg are not even at the starting gate, they make Vodafone, Metoeor and O2 publish the location of THEIR antennae ...on a map on the Comreg site, while Eircom don't have to at all despite the fact the Cells and Eircoms FWPMA antennae are all Omni Microwave devices.


M

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Hornet
It would take a lot of time and might legally not even be possible, I accept that. But if we look to the future, I would like to refer back to Muck's contribution about the Local Authorities opportunity to make sure that from now on, the mistakes of the past won't be repeated. They are clearly NOT taking this opportunity.

Again, I agree with the idea that more unbundling should be done and that whatever new ducting is put in place must be done provided on a vendor neutral basis. As a side benefit, it would make these fibre rings more cost effective.

It is indeed another issue, but a very close one in a discussion about fibre rings.

I don't expect too many readers here to share my opinion, but I do not think Donegal should have such telecommunications infrastructure. I am coming back to my motorway analogy: In my opinion streets are required to/in/around Donegal, but not motorways.[

Over time this can change IF commercially there is a justification for it, but I haven't heard about plans to build a motorway to Donegal. I guess the reason is that nobody could commercially justify it.

I disagree with the motorway analogy. If alternatives to Eircom are going to be built and if currently there is no means of accessing Eircom's network, then new fibre will need to be laid. If new fibre is to be laid then it makes sence to lay a lot of it to provide for future needs. The extra cost is far from linear. Most of the expense is in digging up the roads.

I agree that it was a mistake to privatise Eircom's network in the way they did. But the country got 7 billion euros out of it. I have no problem with a tiny portion of this being used to facilitate regional development.