The Cush wrote: » The Dept/Minister appear reluctant to answer questions in relation to the mapping consultation Peter's question today to the Minister at the press conference on the submissions to the mapping consultation, went unanswered In his article in the SBP last Sunday he said ...
Peter O' Dwyer@peterodwyer1 30 separate operators & representative groups have responded to govt’s call to submit details of their commercial broadband plans, @sundaybusiness can reveal. 180 submissions in total. Could yet change # of homes in NBP & create further delay.
Broadband plan under review after 130 responses to public consultation Department asked operators if they planned to install ‘new and substantive’ networks Peter O’Dwyer Oct 13, 2019 The Department of Communications is reviewing the scale of the multibillion-euro National Broadband Plan (NBP) after receiving 180 responses to the consultation process on the number of premises to be included in the scheme. The department launched the public consultation earlier this year to finalise the number of homes and premises that will be covered by the NBP. It asked operators to submit any plans they had for “new and substantive” networks which will be implemented...https://www.businesspost.ie/news/broadband-plan-review-130-responses-public-consultation-454772?utm_source=twitter
The Cush wrote: » 30 separate operators & representative groups have responded to govt’s call to submit details of their commercial broadband plans, @sundaybusiness can reveal. 180 submissions in total. Could yet change # of homes in NBP & create further delay.
30 separate operators & representative groups have responded to govt’s call to submit details of their commercial broadband plans, @sundaybusiness can reveal. 180 submissions in total. Could yet change # of homes in NBP & create further delay.
clohamon wrote: » I’m thinking @sundaybusiness isn't 'revealing' anything more than the PQ that @KOR101 already spotted earlier in the week.https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=111470322&postcount=794
Orebro wrote: » Don’t they have to commit legally to rolling out in areas they say they will, otherwise the submission won’t be taken into consideration?
KOR101 wrote: » Yes, that's correct, but they are going to claim that they are already providing a service and then it become a legal argument based on EU laws relating to State aid. And, there is no point in arguning about the quality of the service they provide, because legal arguments will follow legal logic.
Johnboy1951 wrote: » Read the bit next to that '234K' and then say whether or not anyone in their right mind could make that claim in all truthfulness. It is clearly just a gambit to delay things so they can get a few more suckers customers signed up before the fibre has an impact.
allanpkr wrote: » the clever wisps saw they couldnt compete and joined up with a ftth provider to get into future game. those without the foresight or just too stubborn to adapt to changing market are saying they werent included in process. throughout time businesses that dont adapt to changing markets go bust , even big ones like thomas cook.
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » Most if not all of the WISPs that sell FTTH are part of the group that has responded to this consultation. Westnet are perhaps one of the only ones not complaining and I don't think they even see themselves as a WISP anymore.
allanpkr wrote: » but are these so called wisps providing ftth or just selling broadband.i.e the infrastructure.
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.
allanpkr wrote: » wisps may supply broadband , but are they saying they can supply the fibre cable along road. if not they are not in npb equation. my point was that wisps complaining that they ars going to lose business , is not revelevent. cause progress moves on , as they should have done. like westnet who are a great company and now provide through joint venture with siro ftth . they adapted to survive and grow. wisps that dont adapt dont survive.
Johnboy1951 wrote: » On what do you base that statement? What is there in the tender requirement for the NBP that specifies the connection must be over fibre cable to the premises? Answer: Nothing, as far as I am aware.
Orebro wrote: » It specifies requirements that can only be delivered by FTTH.
Marlow wrote: » Not true. Because it is already specified, that some of it will have to be delivered by wireless. No way around it. And the speeds also could be delivered using other transport. Next gen cable TV for example. /M
allanpkr wrote: » only that the specific requirements stated can only be delivered by ftth. happy now thars been explained.
Johnboy1951 wrote: » What specific requirements? You must know that it is possible to deliver 150Mb/s connections over fixed wireless at the present time. Also given the rate of change in the industry, it will be possible to deliver much higher speeds in future years, through the new technology in development and test. So, no, I am not aware of any specific requirements in the tender document that prevent the use of fixed wireless as a medium for the connections. In fact it is the stated intent that a percentage of the NBP connections, even if it is fibre based, will be by fixed wireless. What is not in the NBP of course is the concept that fixed wireless throughout rural Ireland for high speed broadband to all, is not at all practical. That is where it fails as it would not generate profit if done correctly, due to the costs of masts etc.. Now maybe you understand.
allanpkr wrote: » you must know the nbp ,s quality control doesnt mean you can supply 150mb/s at 5 am in morning only. i dont know any wispa at the moment that can give 150mb/s at peak if 150mb/s is what you are paying for. please i hope you can prove me wrong.
The high horse brigade wrote: » The problem with FWA is the backhaul to the remote mast, not the technology!
allanpkr wrote: » show me any wispa that delivers what customers are paying for at peak. its all i ask , not much really.
The high horse brigade wrote: » http://www.airwire.ie/index.php/products/jet Like I said, it's not the technology, it's the backhaul to remote masts
allanpkr wrote: » im not sure i understand , are you saying wispas cant deliver that cause of backhaul to mast. and if so as a person whose is not tech wise , could you explain what backhaul to mask means in laymans terms.
Orebro wrote: » Marlow please stop muddying the waters!
