nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

ED E

They've published!

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.

http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/revealed-700000-homes-and-businesses-to-get-subsidised-fast-broadband-in-new-plan-30769126.html

Edit: Video

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

fritzelly

roddy15 wrote: »

What private group is going to agree to build something they'll never actually control either?

Lots of companies do this, why it was ever envisaged that the tender should give over complete control to some company (who at the end of the day has very little exposure if things go belly up) who is basically a contractor for the government and our money.

tsue921i8wljb3

fritzelly wrote: »

Lots of companies do this, why it was ever envisaged that the tender should give over complete control to some company (who at the end of the day has very little exposure if things go belly up) who is basically a contractor for the government and our money.

Here's an explanation of the two ownership models that were in play and why the Commercial Stimulus option was chosen:

https://www.dccae.gov.ie/en-ie/news-and-media/press-releases/Pages/“It’s%20a%20decision%20on%20the%20scale%20and%20significance%20of%20rural%20electrification%20in%20the%20last%20century”%20–%20Minister%20Denis%20Naughten.aspx

[Deleted User]

fritzelly wrote: »

Lots of companies do this, why it was ever envisaged that the tender should give over complete control to some company (who at the end of the day has very little exposure if things go belly up) who is basically a contractor for the government and our money.

I mean the original bidders included Eir, is Eir really going to agree to let the state own such infrastructure?

fritzelly

oscarBravo wrote: »

How many homes in Ireland are "miles from anyone else"? I don't have numbers, but I'd imagine it's very low single digit percentages, and almost none of the tiny handful I can think of have been built recently.

And - I'm blue in the face saying it - it would be cheaper to run fibre to any of that tiny handful that to try to build a wireless network to service them.

There are plenty of one off or even 2 or 3 or 4 off houses miles from anyone else.
Not saying its in the tens of thousands but there is certainly enough of them.
No company is going to run fibre to them just so the government can say well everyone has access to fibre when the chances are it's a 50/50 whether they even want it. Fibre to the home for every house is a complete pipe dream and will never happen.
Even with eir's 30% ish take up it is offset by the fact that the cable would need to be run past the houses anyway. Running fibre an extra mile up the road for a coupla houses is not cost effective or value for money for the tax payer - even if one house takes it up. And certainly not where any profits from that go straight back into that private companies profits.

fritzelly

roddy15 wrote: »

I mean the original bidders included Eir, is Eir really going to agree to let the state own such infrastructure?

If it had been eir that won the contract then the costs would have been significantly cheaper. As it is now another company will have to pay eir to use their infrastructure unless they end up using ESB's

9726_9726

fritzelly wrote: »

...some company who is basically a contractor for the government and our money.

Exactly. Just like with the MANs. Except these were a "concession" over a public asset. Except this time, it's not a concession, it's ownership!

The whole NBP thing was built on a false premise of "market failure". There is no market failure - nobody wants the low-density bits. That is the market being the market, functioning normally, no failure there.

The good news is that the viability of smaller areas becomes better over time.

The bad news is that it is too slow/law of diminishing returns/will never get to the last cottage on the last hill.

This leaves the NBP being such a gross distortion of what the market actually is, that it is a real long shot to get it over the line. It is fraught with difficulties, way beyond the actual network rollout. Pulling it off would, in an ideal world, be good for the country, potentially giving a competitive advantage over countries where broadband provision is left in a natural/market state. But what confidence do we have in the State when it comes to interfering in a market like this and promising people something that is politically desirable, but nigh on impossible to pull off?

Ireland has a history of Teflon politics. The PAC has no teeth. Naughten et al can go in and read the same line over and over, see the day out, move on. He was extremely careless in having multiple meetings with a bidder. This could sink the thing.

Or maybe he'll get it over the line and deliver another huge piece of taxpayer funded infrastructure to some foreign vultures. It's ugly as hell either way.

But I am sure that someday, my kids will drive me around and I'll recognise the yankee GMC Capital/NBP splice cases, on former State poles, on State public rights-of-way, and they will ask my why our overlords sold us out yet again, like another bail-out, to the highest and only bidder.

Maybe by then we'll have sold the roads too. Or given them away with €2.5bn to upgrade them.

[Deleted User]

9726_9726 wrote: »

The whole NBP thing was built on a false premise of "market failure". There is no market failure - nobody wants the low-density bits. That is the market being the market, functioning normally, no failure there.

The good news is that the viability of smaller areas becomes better over time.

The bad news is that it is too slow/law of diminishing returns/will never get to the last cottage on the last hill.

I'm sorry but there is no market failure? I'm sorry but are you in the same country? Do you want to maybe define your "market failure" definition because from what I can see rural Ireland's broadband is a market failure. I'll even define it for you:

"Market failure is a situation in which the allocation of goods and services by a free market is not efficient, often it leads to a net social welfare loss. Market failures can be viewed as scenarios where individuals' pursuit of pure self-interest leads to results that are not efficient – that can be improved upon from the societal point of view"

From a societal point of view the broadband situation can and should be improved. We have a situation where the progress made outside of cities is a complete shambles where people are filling up the capacity the likes of Imagine can actually provide. Meanwhile, Eir has sat on a monopoly of the infrastructure and done practically nothing with it because to them it's not profitable to do so but for society it is, that's textbook market failure no? While it may be efficient to the companies to ignore rural Ireland, that's not in the ideal world how it ought to work.

And before I hear "but the 300,000!" let's be absolutely honest here, they wouldn't have bothered their arses with that rollout had the NBP not come along and threatened the status quo.

westyIrl

I'm betting Denis (the Naughten one) is keeping the pressure on his officials to wrap up the evaluation on this bid so he can announce a good news story and take the sting out of questions from Catherine Murphy.

How in the world no one in McGrahan/McCourt thought of how detrimental any Denis O'Brien connection (direct or in-direct) would be to the optics of this plan is baffling in the extreme. Made all the worse by the fact Actavo amongst others were obviously included for the sole purpose to give the perception of a capable consortium. The irony is that this inclusion is the very thing that could unhinge the NBP due to the increased scrutiny it is attracting.

I'm one of the people here who badly requires what this plan promises. I also agree that the wrong model was pursued from the start and it is ridiculous that, what I envisage, will be valuable infrastructure in 25 years time will be handed over into private hands, after we (and our children) have paid to build it.

However, I also don't think that there is anything to be gained by changing course at this stage. Not for the reason that I require fiber yesterday; but that it would be a dangerous assumption in this country to believe any other plan/minister/party/govt would do any better.

Jim

KOR101

Some early morning comedy.

The department spokesman last night said that the minister did not engage in the conversation that took place at the dinner, other than to tell the businessman that it would be inappropriate to discuss the broadband plan. The spokesman said one of the minister’s officials noted the information relayed by Mr McCourt and passed it on to the National Broadband Division upon his return to Dublin.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/concern-over-naughten-s-dinner-with-head-of-bid-xhd8h3zst

fritzelly

Could you repeat that?

ArrBee

KOR101 wrote: »

Some early morning comedy.

The department spokesman last night said that the minister did not engage in the conversation that took place at the dinner, other than to tell the businessman that it would be inappropriate to discuss the broadband plan. The spokesman said one of the minister’s officials noted the information relayed by Mr McCourt and passed it on to the National Broadband Division upon his return to Dublin.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/concern-over-naughten-s-dinner-with-head-of-bid-xhd8h3zst

Is that kind of like "not inhaling" when you are smoking a scooby?

Johnboy1951

https://www.rte.ie/radio1/morning-ireland/

Ten Pin

This "messing" that accompanies any / all such issues involving state contracts is so ingrained that they just can't help themselves, so much so that it's second nature and can't see any conflict of interest whatsoever or else they just don't care as long as they keep their pensions.

The quacking is deafening at this stage.

turbbo

The Stand with Eamon Dunphy - podcast:
https://itunes.apple.com/ie/podcast/ep-236-is-denis-obrien-about-to-bag-another-big-state/id1178026212?i=1000420474260&mt=2

tototoe

Ten Pin wrote: »

This "messing" that accompanies any / all such issues involving state contracts is so ingrained that they just can't help themselves, so much so that it's second nature and can't see any conflict of interest whatsoever or else they just don't care as long as they keep their pensions.

The quacking is deafening at this stage.

They don't care to be honest. Just more of the same imo. When people keep voting for the same narrow band of politicians either FF or FG, that's what happens.

oscarBravo

fritzelly wrote: »

There are plenty of one off or even 2 or 3 or 4 off houses miles from anyone else.
Not saying its in the tens of thousands but there is certainly enough of them.
No company is going to run fibre to them...

How many of them don't have electricity?

How many of them don't have mobile coverage?

Want to place a wager as to which number is higher?

tsue921i8wljb3

Oh dear. What was Denis thinking?

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/retail-and-services/naughten-defends-meeting-bidder-during-broadband-tender-process-1.3651520

https://www.independent.ie/business/naughten-defends-meeting-with-broadband-bidder-during-tender-process-37386146.html

Minutes of the meeting have been released to RTÉ.

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2018/1004/1000861-national-broadband/

fritzelly

oscarBravo wrote: »

How many of them don't have electricity?

How much did it cost them?

The high horse brigade

fritzelly wrote: »

How much did it cost them?

I don't understand. If they have electricity why not use the same infrastructure to deliver fibre.

oscarBravo

fritzelly wrote: »

How much did it cost them?

You seem to be working hard to avoid my point, in large part through selective quoting.

You argue that it's unfeasible to bring a wired service to every house in the country, while every house in the country has a wired service.

You argue that it will be necessary to provide a wireless service to these houses, when not every house in the country has a wireless service.

This idea that it's easy to provide 100% wireless coverage of the country is completely unsupported by the evidence, and needs to die in a fire.

[Deleted User]

oscarBravo wrote: »

How many of them don't have electricity?

How many of them don't have mobile coverage?

Want to place a wager as to which number is higher?

This is actually an interesting point, I go in and out to Limerick pretty much every day, there's a stretch of backroads where the mobile coverage is basically ****, barely passes for 3G, want to know what they have on the telephone poles? Fibre....

wexfordman2

fritzelly wrote: »

How much did it cost them?

Part from the obvious and restrictive issues with deploying a wireless solution, just to highlight a few non technical issues with a wireless deploy ment.

1) advanced wireless networks have been in this country for nearly 25 years.
2) 4 different networks rolled out, and still not near 100% geographical coverage.... Precisely because its not easy.
3) The hidden costs of wireless are not obvious, including spectrum licencing, planning costs, software licencing costs, feature costs, rental and maintenance.
4) Deployment Costs if about 100k per site are not outlandish. This could end up serving anything from 10 to 100 people only.
5) taking the project lifespan of 25 years....and this one is an absolute deezer....most.if the existing mobile networks have had 3 or 4 network upgrades within the last 20 years!!! One former company I worked for just over 20 years replaced the hardware in their access network 4 times, and are planning on doing it again shortly. That's 5 times within 25 years they have completely replaced all the hardware in their access network in order to keep providing up to date and evolving services and standards.
6) we haven't even begun to discuss the requirements of a backhaul network to support that.

So, yeah, rollout national wireless, overspend on a short term project where you are pretty much guaranteed to need to swap the entire network out again in 5 years.

KOR101

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

Oh dear. What was Denis thinking?

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/retail-and-services/naughten-defends-meeting-bidder-during-broadband-tender-process-1.3651520

https://www.independent.ie/business/naughten-defends-meeting-with-broadband-bidder-during-tender-process-37386146.html

Minutes of the meeting have been released to RTÉ.

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2018/1004/1000861-national-broadband/

Although, I think as sh**storms go, this is pretty minor. Imagine what would have happened if the whole thing had collapsed.

turbbo

KOR101 wrote: »

Although, I think as sh**storms go, this is pretty minor. Imagine what would have happened if the whole thing had collapsed.

I'd agree that this is just noise from opposition on this particular news. Far worse has happened out in the open - in front of everybody because of dumb EU funding regulations making what should be a simple process massively complicated - that's when cute hoors like Dennis O'Brien show up in the mix. Don't see how he's any worse than the rest of them in Eircom at this stage.

westyIrl

KOR101 wrote: »

Although, I think as sh**storms go, this is pretty minor. Imagine what would have happened if the whole thing had collapsed.

Completely agree. If this is as dirty as he gets his jib, he'll have done well. Good job minutes were kept, regardless of how reflective of reality they are.

I'd hate to see the plan sink over something like this.

Jim

The Cush

Changes to the enet consortium? Tomorrow's Sunday Indo

https://twitter.com/adrianweckler/status/1048697654274920454

https://twitter.com/adrianweckler/status/1048700226138267648

tsue921i8wljb3

The Cush wrote: »

Changes to the enet consortium? Tomorrow's Sunday Indo

I wonder is it something to do with this?

The need for a permanent, Irish-based, leadership position within the enet-led consortium ('the consortium') - This was being addressed and an individual has been selected for the role.

from

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2018/1004/1000861-national-broadband/

tsue921i8wljb3

Death by a thousand cuts...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/state-broadband-bidder-granahan-mccourt-sued-for-contract-breach-rxm8n7crq?t=ie

Granahan McCourt, the company leading the sole consortium bidding for the state’s €1bn broadband contract, the National Broadband Plan (NBP), was fighting a €19m lawsuit over the sale of Enet shares when its owner hosted Denis Naughten, the communications minister, and four of his officials at a New York dinner.

I'm not even sure if this is much of a story but there seems to be a concerted effort by some to drive this process over a cliff.

The Cush

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

Death by a thousand cuts...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/state-broadband-bidder-granahan-mccourt-sued-for-contract-breach-rxm8n7crq?t=ie

I'm not even sure if this is much of a story but there seems to be a concerted effort by some to drive this process over a cliff.

https://twitter.com/gloverstweets/status/1048714050149015552

tsue921i8wljb3

Why is he attending book launches and private dinners hosted by the front man of the bidder for a massive state contract? Surely he can see the optics are terrible.