The government has published a new map outlining in detail 700,000 rural homes and businesses which will be connected to state-subsidised broadband of at least 30 megabits per second (Mbs) from 2016.
Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: » I'm saying it may now not be viable for Siro and enet to continue in the process. Eir drew their blue line map for a specific reason and it looks like their masterstroke has paid off.
Johnboy1951 wrote: » I know what you are saying, but I see no basis for it. Why would it not be viable for them to bid? It is up to the gov to assess the bids. It will not cost much to re-jig the figures to account for the loss of the blue-line premises. It is most likely they have already done so. So how it is not viable for them to send in their bid? The work to produce the bid is already done.
Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: » I'm just concerned that the potential return will not be there for them. Take your own town Ennis. Say Siro have a POP there. Now they have to bring fibre to some rural area outside Ennis. But Eir have cherrypicked all the higher density rural areas around the town that Siro will have to pass through to reach the lower density rural area. Eir will have locked anyone that wanted fibre into contracts meaning Siro must wait 12 or 18 months before hoping to entice them to switch. So Siro is left with the less profitable lower density areas. I'm not saying it will happen but I would not be surprised to see one or both of the other bidders pulling out.
Johnboy1951 wrote: » We seem to be at cross purposes Yes there is already competition in Ennis from both eir and SIRO providing FTTH. But none of that should have any affect on the ability to bid for a contract. Certainly the 'per premises' cost of providing the service will rise. That is the government's problem as it will rise for both SIRO and Enet. If the eir spend on the blue lines is factored in then I suspect there would be little difference in the cost to eir. SIRO or Enet. In any case it does not in any way prevent or discourage a bid being offered. It might well have influence on who is the lowest bidder - but if eir factor in their costs for the blue line areas then possibly not. So I see no reason whatsoever for Enet or Siro or Eir to not bid for the contracts. That is the only point on which we are disagreeing.
wexfordman2 wrote: » The main reason that they may pull out, is simply because they might see that they would not be able to put in a competitive tender. If they have a good idea they cannot compete with eir, then it's a bit like me going to an auction at sothebys, a pointless waste of time, and expense.
Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: » I'm just concerned that the potential return will not be there for them.
Johnboy1951 wrote: » I wonder if there is a EU requirement, that having selecting the short list of three, that there must be bids received from all three, else a substitute must be found? Only wondering about it .......
KOR101 wrote: » Does anyone know how commitment contracts work. I assume they can't be open ended in terms of completion date. Are their financial penalties if commitments are not met? How real are they in practice?
rob808 wrote: » https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/government-set-to-release-final-broadband-intervention-map-1.3034091?mode=amp
rob808 wrote: » http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/broadband-rollout-cut-means-rural-areas-face-more-delays-35591537.htmlhttp://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/changes-to-state-broadband-scheme-may-bring-legal-challenge-1.3035489
plodder wrote: » It's up to Eir to prove that wrong now and of course on how solid the agreement between the government and Eir is, and if it has real teeth/penalties as regards non-performance.
KOR101 wrote: » A maximum fine of €20m for God's sake.
damienirel wrote: » After all the talk of "years of planning"- it looks like the government and dept. went out on the lash instead. The tender will be pushed out even further with legal problems and Dennis Naughton and his ilk can pass the the parcel to the next bunch of clowns that get elected to "fixsh the roads".
Johnboy1951 wrote: » The full terms of the eir commitment contract will make an interesting read. I can only hope that the gov has eir tied very tightly to their commitment, and suitable penalties if they fail at each stage of their commitment. We wait for the publishing of the contract.
plodder wrote: » I suppose the worst case, most pessimistic scenario is that they just suck up the €20 million fine for being late, which is peanuts in terms of overall value. There really should be recurring fines for every month they are late beyond the end of 2018. The whole basis of the NBP is now that these areas are served before it gets going. If that means that Eir only have the resources to deliver one chunk of the NBP then so be it. They can't be allowed to deliver both NBP and the 300K in parallel. I could see that being the basis for a challenge.
Johnboy1951 wrote: » As we don't have any definite details on the contract as yet we cannot be sure that what you post is fact ..... but most is likely I suppose. I see no real purpose is speculating without the contract details, TBH. Hopefully by tomorrow those details will be available.