NBP part II

allanpkr wrote: »

Im in agreement with heavydawson and field of sheep, but on one point. When someone or anyone keeps posting saying nbp is faulty , corrupt, and wrong . 1 i would like to know gheir agenda. Especially as i was asked to be honest, in my replys then i expect honesty back. However just cause w isp didnt get involved in the procsss doesnt mean it wasnt all inclusive. Saying irish jobs will be lost is not the fault of nbp. We would then have to say we cannot allow any progress as this might effect existing jobs. Where would ireland be if that was done in ireland but not rest of world. Is it unfortunate yes of course, but progress must be allowed to move on. My w isp i use has adapted and if you have ftth they will provide the broadband, and i will use them . If you have an agenda which he obviously has then i feel you should in all honesty say what connection you have to broadband. If you say this is not the way go nbp then yes i think you should say what your alt is.

Even I'd argue the NBP is faulty on a number of fronts (state ownership of assets, the naivety of Naughton in meeting McCourt, the lack of competition). And people who object to the _idea_ of the NBP are also not necessarily wrong from their point of view. People are allowed to disagree with the NBP on principle without justification. That's just one of the things that we all need to accept when it comes to spending taxpayers money. There's plenty of people who disagreed with the 8th amendment, and while they were in the minority, they're absolutely entitled to their opinions, and they're not _wrong_. They're just in the minority. That's a subtle but important difference.

While having a bit of context around people's existing connections and/or affiliation with the industry gives some additional context, it's not the be-all and end-all.

The loss of Irish jobs argument is a divisive one. There's been some strong words from the regional WISPs about the impact this will have on their business, and I think anyone working outside of that space would be foolish to make arguments for/against without having the inside information the WISPS have.
My hope is that the WISP get skin in the game WRT to FTTH, and that the government ensures the barrier to entry is as low as possible. Effectively, more of the likes of this:
https://siro.ie/siro-drives-competition-in-the-broadband-market/

SIRO has welcomed Nova Telecom to its stable of retail partners. Offering 100% Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) 1 Gigabit broadband in Cork, with services going live on October 1st this year and ultimately available to over 65,000 homes and business in the county. The decision to offer FTTP broadband services powered by SIRO supports Nova Telecom’s existing Fixed Wireless Access, Dedicated Internet Access (DIA), and Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) services.

With the right approach to access of the NBP fibre, the WISPs could branch out into offering fibre packages in their respective areas. However, it's a different ball game if you're up against the marketing prowess of the incumbents that will inevitably look to get a foothold (Virgin, Eir, VF , Sky, etc.). The WISPs could differentiate themselves on things like customer support, etc. The WISP I currently use (Nova) has excellent support, far beyond anything I've seen with the larger operators.

allanpkr

I agree the wisp im with i think has also joined with siro to offer ftth. As i have been with this w isp for many years and got great customer service as you did with yours, once i get ftth as i stated i will stay loyal.

https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/rural-ireland-at-risk-without-broadband-microsoft-boss-warns-38520378.html

heavydawson wrote: »

With the right approach to access of the NBP fibre, the WISPs could branch out into offering fibre packages in their respective areas. However, it's a different ball game if you're up against the marketing prowess of the incumbents that will inevitably look to get a foothold (Virgin, Eir, VF , Sky, etc.). The WISPs could differentiate themselves on things like customer support, etc. The WISP I currently use (Nova) has excellent support, far beyond anything I've seen with the larger operators.

A lot of regional providers have exactly done that. Nova is quite late to the game. If you look at the current providers on SIRO, you'll find Airwire, Carnsore Broadband, Kerry Broadband, Rocket Broadband and Westnet. All of these have been doing this for 2 years or more now.

If you look at the regional providers providing FTTH on OpenEIR, you'll find even more regional providers. Also here .. at least 8 of them doing it for more than 2 years.

The issue with the NBP in it's current proposed form is, that the wholesale pricing that has been indicated for access is not competitive. It exceeds OpenEIRs wholesale pricing, which is already a lot more expensive than SIRO. The retail price will be not be affordable for the majority of households within the NBP. Combine that with existing regional providers offering other products at a more competitive price point, that means the reimbursement clause for lack of take up is guaranteed to kick in. And that is money, that the tax payer ( any !! taxpayer ) will have to fork out.

/M

Pique

KOR101

Marlow wrote: »

The issue with the NBP in it's current proposed form is, that the wholesale pricing that has been indicated for access is not competitive. It exceeds OpenEIRs wholesale pricing, which is already a lot more expensive than SIRO. The retail price will be not be affordable for the majority of households within the NBP. Combine that with existing regional providers offering other products at a more competitive price point, that means the reimbursement clause for lack of take up is guaranteed to kick in. And that is money, that the tax payer ( any !! taxpayer ) will have to fork out.

/M

The likes of Imagine certainly could have a big market after the NBP with a low price basic product. Anyone who just wants to do emails and a bit of browsing or those with a holiday home need a product at about €30/month. They'll never pay €60/70/month.

OK....

The retail price will be not be affordable for the majority of households within the NBP

Data to back that assertion up?

existing regional providers offering other products at a more competitive price point

Every single house in the NBP intervention area has a regional alternative? A competitive price point suggests you're getting the same service for a cheaper price. By their very nature, WISPs are not fibre providers, and are therefore not offering the same service. SIRO are cheaper (I speculate here) because their capital outlay costs are far cheaper given their deployment area. You cannot really compare the investment SIRO have made to what's required for NBP, and how you'd price such a product. Furthermore, SIRO are operating primarily in areas where there is healthy competition (urban areas), so they _have_ to be price competitive. In the NBP intervention area, the competition will be patchy at best, and highly unlikely to match what NBP will offer. Here it is from the horses mouth:
https://www.comreg.ie/media/dlm_uploads/2015/12/ComReg14126s.pdf

It is expected that DCENR will set wholesale NBP prices by benchmarking against similar wholesale prices in urban areas

that means the reimbursement clause for lack of take up is guaranteed to kick in

Opinion, so not guaranteed. Likely perhaps, but not guaranteed. I do believe that compensation is capped in any case.

KOR101 wrote: »

The likes of Imagine certainly could have a big market after the NBP with a low price basic product. Anyone who just wants to do emails and a bit of browsing or those with a holiday home need a product at about €30/month. They'll never pay €60/70/month.

Thats the territory most regional providers operate their basic packages in and there are plenty, that won't pay more than 35 EUR/month. They just can't afford it.

Imagine haven't even copped on to that.

/M

heavydawson wrote: »

Data to back that assertion up?

I have insight into a few providers (primarily rural) and from experience over 50% are in the cheapest packages. Thats the 30-45 EUR pricepoint. They can't afford more. That's as much as I can say.

Also the cost of installation is a big issue. A lot of lack of takeup on the OpenEir 300k comes from installation costs and civils needed on peoples own premises. So just because they are passed does not mean they take it, because it is not economically feasable. SIRO opposed to that take on the entire build to the meter and costs a fraction to install. OpenEir stops at the premise boundary.

These are all factors that will determine takeup.

/M

Marlow wrote: »

I have insight into a few providers (primarily rural) and from experience over 50% are in the cheapest packages. Thats the 30-45 EUR pricepoint. They can't afford more. That's as much as I can say.

Also the cost of installation is a big issue. A lot of lack of takeup on the OpenEir 300k comes from installation costs and civils needed on peoples own premises. So just because they are passed does not mean they take it, because it is not economically feasable. SIRO opposed to that take on the entire build to the meter and costs a fraction to install. OpenEir stops at the premise boundary.

These are all factors that will determine takeup.

/M

You do realise that NBI are proposing a similar installation procedure to SIRO? The max a customer will pay for installation is €100. All other costs up to €5000 are covered by NBI.

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

You do realise that NBI are proposing a similar installation procedure to SIRO? The max a customer will pay for installation is €100. All other costs up to €5000 are covered by NBI.

Yes. But that is not the costly part of it. It is the ducting on private property that turns most people off, that give up on getting fibre.

On top of that the proposed monthly wholesale pricing is higher than OpenEir. And that is the bigger problem right there.

That sort of retail pricing will only suit powerusers or those where work may pay for it, which has become less in later years.

/M

Marlow wrote: »

Yes. But that is not the costly part of it. It is the ducting on private property that turns most people off, that give up on getting fibre. And a lot of premises will also exceed 5k for the build.

On top of that the proposed monthly wholesale pricing is higher than OpenEir. And that is the bigger problem right there.

That sort of retail pricing will only suit powerusers or those where work may pay for it, which has become less in later years.

/M

They will cover the costs of ducting on private premises. You can't know how many premises will exceed €5000. "Very rare circumstances" was the Department's quote.

This is all academic anyway. The Government are not going to cancel the project at this stage. So what do you see stopping it?

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

They will cover the costs of ducting on private premises. You can't know how many premises will exceed €5000. "Very rare circumstances" was the Department's quote.

This is all academic anyway.

Yeah .. right .. that's the same department, that has been managing the process so stellar up until now ? That's also the same department that has pushed the date of signing the contract how many times now ?

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

The Government are not going to cancel the project at this stage. So what do you see stopping it?

Oh .. I'm not seeing them stopping it. But there may still be elements and premises in the contract, that will be removed or changed, changing the entire figure. It will be either that or they may loose the EU funding as they might find themselves in violation of the terms of that money.

/M

Marlow wrote: »

Yeah .. right .. that's the same department, that has been managing the process so stellar up until now ? That's also the same department that has pushed the date of signing the contract how many times now ?

Oh .. I'm not seeing them stopping it. But there may still be elements and premises in the contract, that will be removed or changed, changing the entire figure. It will be either that or they may loose the EU funding as they might find themselves in violation of the terms of that money.

/M

They are not going to voluntarily remove premises covered by wireless operators. The implication then is that the wireless operators are going to take legal action to attempt to have these premises removed thus either delaying or ending the NBP.

Have you any concern about the reputational damage such action would do to small regional operators? They will be the ones who are seen to be standing in the way of progress. I could foresee a certain amount of backlash from rural areas when people realise that their promised broadband is not coming as a result of such action.

For premises to be removed, 2 independent providers need to cover said premise with speeds in line with NGA requirements.

So the current consultation for premises passed by all operators can very well have an impact on the NBP.

It will be interesting to see.

As for the reputational damage .. no, I can not see that being an issue, when the product that the NBP is bringing is not affordable to average Joe.

Sure, the majority of people who can avail of the 300k are not even aware of it. The talk in the pubs is that this whole NBP thing is going to give rural Ireland free fibre broadband (i kid you not !)

/M

Marlow wrote: »

For premises to be removed, 2 independent providers need to cover said premise with speeds in line with NGA requirements.

So the current consultation for premises passed by all operators can very well have an impact on the NBP.

It will be interesting to see.

As for the reputational damage .. no, I can not see that being an issue, when the product that the NBP is bringing is not affordable to average Joe.

Sure, the majority of people who can avail of the 300k are not even aware of it. The talk in the pubs is that this whole NBP thing is going to give rural Ireland free fibre broadband (i kid you not !)

/M

Dangerous game you are playing. I hope it works out for you.

Also ..

On the cost of connecting premises. Just look at all the ones that OpenEir have left out in the 300k, that are more than 150m away from the road or network. Each one of these is likely to exceed the 5k figure as you have no other premises sharing network cost to get to them.

/M

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

Dangerous game you are playing. I hope it works out for you.

As I said. It was never an all inclusive consultation. How would they not expect it to backfire ?

They set the rules. So when data emerges, their subset needs to be adjusted. It was actually pointed out at a committee hearing not too long ago, that probably less than half of the NBP really need the NBP intervention, as others are covered with speeds as determined by the NGA requirements or are commercially viable.

/M

westyIrl

Marlow wrote: »

For premises to be removed, 2 independent providers need to cover said premise with speeds in line with NGA requirements.

Excuse my ignorance but what are these NGA requirements? What sort of specs?

KOR101

Marlow wrote: »

As I said. It was never an all inclusive consultation. How would they not expect it to backfire ?

They set the rules. So when data emerges, their subset needs to be adjusted. It was actually pointed out at a committee hearing not too long ago, that probably less than half of the NBP really need the NBP intervention, as others are covered with speeds as determined by the NGA requirements or are commercially viable and will be covered by operators anyhow in a foreseeable future.

It is also the reason they keep pushing the date for signature of the contract. They can't justify it .. neither budget wise, nor with data that has turned up against it .. especially in the last year. Either way .. that's just my opinion. But if it was a rock solid case, the contracts would have been signed last year. Fact.

/M

The problem is that it was indeed all inclusive.

Also, the budget has nothing to do with it anymore. The government has already decided.

The best legal case would be about Naughton's behaviour. He wasn't sacked for no reason. But, it's hard to see how the WISPs lost out because of what he did.

user1842

westyIrl wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance but what are these NGA requirements? What sort of specs?

Indeed and what WISPs currently satisfy them?

I would wager Imagine dont even come close.

westyIrl wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance but what are these NGA requirements? What sort of specs?

30 Mbit/s now, 100 Mbit/s by 2025.

And may I point out, that any premise that has been excluded by the NBP because they are being serviced by Virgin can not avail of Gbit/s and is not fibre.

Any premise, that is covered by VDSL and hence has been excluded from the NBP can not avail of Gbit/s ... the good news for a majority of those is, that OpenEIR is now rolling fibre out for the majority of them, but that wasn't on the cards a year ago. It won't be all inclusive though. 1.7M premises are tagged VDSL. 1.4M premises are in the IFN. Of those 1.4M premises some are NBP. Meaning there will be 300-400k, that will be stuck with VDSL.

user1842 wrote: »

Indeed and what WISPs currently satisfy them?

I would wager Imagine dont even come close.

The technology that Imagine uses can achieve those speeds. Contention is a different matter, which would need (and should) be challenged with the Department. I don't believe, that it's a coincidence that Imagine all of a sudden published their full coverage on their website about 2-3 weeks ago. If they submit that, it will have a major impact.

ISPs that satisfy those speeds currently are for example: Net1, BBNet, Airwire .. if you're on their Radwin Jet platform.

/M

KOR101 wrote: »

The problem is that it was indeed all inclusive.

Also, the budget has nothing to do with it anymore. The government has already decided.

The best legal case would be about Naughton's behaviour. He wasn't sacked for no reason. But, it's hard to see how the WISPs lost out because of what he did.

It was not all inclusive, because the tender was structured in a way, where regional providers were excluded from the get go. They were not consulted either. One regional provider even attempted to partake. I leave it at that.

There is over 50 of those in Ireland in various sizes. Each with a different approach on how to cope with this. It's the 3rd time they get buttered under without being consulted. But imagine if the ones, that have NGA compliant infrastructure all submit data now ... there's over 20 of those, I believe. Both the latest Cambrium with GPS timing and Radwin Jet technologies are well capable of delivering NGA compliant speeds and exceed VDSL.

The department can't even argue that, because they were always prepared to deliver broadband under the NBP using wireless for 5-10% of the rollout. By stating that, they have declared fixed wireless a NGA compliant transport media. And this is where they have left themselves open to challenge.

/M

ArrBee

Whenever the mention of "take up" crops up I do a little internal groan. "here we go again" I say to myself.

The only valid argument that puts take up on the table as an issue is any financial penalties that might be applied.
This has been mentioned, and I don't fully understand what financial liability is involved or if it is capped so I won't try and defend that.

But this nonsense that suggests "due to lack of take up we shouldn't build an infrastructure" is ridiculous.
That lack of take up referred to is initial take up. It does not mean houses passed will never connect.

Dero

Marlow wrote: »

30 Mbit/s now, 100 Mbit/s by 2025.

The technology that Imagine uses can achieve those speeds.

Emphasis mine. Having the ability to achieve it and actually realising it are two very different things.

I'm an Imagine (and previously Ripplecom) customer in an intervention area. Surrounded by OE 300k fibre but none on my road.

I'll tell you this; if anyone tries to take me out of the intervention area without my consent, I'll happily rip off their arm an beat them to death with it*

Imagine is the best we can get, but it's still terrible and not fit for purpose. I don't care how it performs at 5AM, if it can't do it between 6PM and midnight, it's not good enough.

* May not be entirely serious, but the sentiment is real

ArrBee wrote: »

That lack of take up referred to is initial take up. It does not mean houses passed will never connect.

Actually it does. Not in the sense of never. But in the sense of it will take a whole generation, before a connection may or may not happen.

/M

Marlow wrote: »

It was not all inclusive, because the tender was structured in a way, where regional providers were excluded from the get go. They were not consulted either. One regional provider even attempted to partake. I leave it at that.

There is over 50 of those in Ireland in various sizes. Each with a different approach on how to cope with this. It's the 3rd time they get buttered under without being consulted. But imagine if the ones, that have NGA compliant infrastructure all submit data now ... there's over 20 of those, I believe. Both the latest Cambrium with GPS timing and Radwin Jet technologies are well capable of delivering NGA compliant speeds and exceed VDSL.

The department can't even argue that, because they were always prepared to deliver broadband under the NBP using wireless for 5-10% of the rollout. By stating that, they have declared fixed wireless a NGA compliant transport media. And this is where they have left themselves open to challenge.

/M

Thanks for referencing some concrete Wireless tech that one can actually do some homework on Marlow. There's too much "the latest wireless tech can do X,Y,Z", and I suspect only those in the industry are fully clued in.

That being said, I took an admittedly cursory glance at the Radwin solution you referenced. Their top-of-the-line subscriber (client-side SU-PRO) is 250mbps, and their base stations support 750mbps (or 2x750mbps for the DUO). The base station supports up to 64 subscribers, so with saturated usage by all 64 subscribers, you're talking ~ 11mbps.

So it's subjectively misleading to say they support NGA speeds. They do so only with an upper bound on the combination of subscribers and per-subscriber usage.

I appreciate the technical information, but it would be great if it could be complemented by some insight into how the WISP generally speaking provision capacity today. Obviously that's commercially sensitive, but you can see where people would be sceptical of claims like "NGA compliant speeds" and "exceeding VDSL" Both are only true in very particular circumstances, not generally.

Also WRT the NBP specs, I need to clarify the numbers you referenced:

30 Mbit/s now, 100 Mbit/s by 2025.

That is for UPLOADS
The download minimum specs are
150Mbps now, 500Mbps by year 11 (Both speeds are MINIMUM)

Dero wrote: »

Emphasis mine. Having the ability to achieve it and actually realising it are two very different things.

I'm an Imagine (and previously Ripplecom) customer in an intervention area. Surrounded by OE 300k fibre but none on my road.

I'll tell you this; if anyone tries to take me out of the intervention area without my consent, I'll happily rip off their arm an beat them to death with it*

You will have to take that up with Imagine and Ripplecom. Because if they both have NGA compliant infrastructure in place to cover your premise and they both submitted your premise to be removed, then that is exactly what can happen.

/M

Dero

Marlow wrote: »

You will have to take that up with Imagine and Ripplecom. Because if they both have NGA compliant infrastructure in place to cover your premise and they both submitted your premise to be removed, then that is exactly what can happen.

/M

Well Ripplecom certainly don't, which is why we moved in the first place.

I suppose though my main point of frustration is the thought that they can make an unverified claim that I have an NGA compliant service when in reality it is nowhere near.

heavydawson wrote: »

That being said, I took an admittedly cursory glance at the Radwin solution you referenced. Their top-of-the-line subscriber (client-side SU-PRO) is 250mbps, and their base stations support 750mbps (or 2x750mbps for the DUO). The base station supports up to 64 subscribers, so with saturated usage by all 64 subscribers, you're talking ~ 11mbps.

So it's subjectively misleading to say they support NGA speeds. They do so only with an upper bound on the combination of subscribers and per-subscriber usage.

FTTH as rolled out currently only guarantees each subscriber 80 Mbit/s. (2.5 Gbit/s downstream total, 32 subs per cluster). By the same calculations, that you just went by. And you could actually run 128 premises per cluster, if you wanted, and it would be 20 Mbit/s guaranteed per premise. That's what the technology allows for. The advantage with the fibre is, that you can upgrade tech either end of the fibre and you get bigger speeds then. But that is actually the same for wireless .. just that wireless doesn't have much scope for increasing speeds anymore. On longer distances that is.

The same goes for the fixed wireless tech above. Just because you can connect 64 customers per sector, does not mean, that the provider does this. It is down to the quality standards of each provider, what saturation/quality they are contempt with.

You as a consumer then choose based on that. But for the excercise of the NBP and NGA compliance, those technologies are well within specification.

/M