clohamon wrote: » Why don't you ask DCCAE about the methodology? ....and submit a PQ or an FOI if they don't reply.
Messer1 wrote: » Could the NBP be double-counting or overstating the claimed 540k premises in the IA? Population passed (NBP) = 1.1 mln Persons per permanent rural home (CS0) = 2.85 Permanent rural homes = 386k Farms (NBP) = 56k Micro Biz & SMEs (NBP) = 44k Total = 486k Difference = 540k - 486k = 54k (holiday homes and what else ??) If 75% farms and 25% biz are located at homes (and *IF* this was ignored in NBP), the total premises falls to 433k and the difference rises to 107k. Any ideas?
The Cush wrote: » In the SBP today Isn't this a bit of a non-story, haven't we always known that subcontractors would be doing the actual work?
The value of the EUR 15 000 voucher will be paid directly to the installation companies by the European Commission within maximum 60 days.
Mortelaro wrote: » Are hubs new panel boxes like Éirs that you're connected into?
NBI to use subcontractors to set up rural broadband hubs Communications Minister Richard Bruton has allocated €119 million to delivering the €6 billion rural broadband scheme next year Hundreds of hubs designed to bring high-speed internet to rural Ireland will be delivered by subcontractors rather than directly by the winning bidder for the National Broadband Plan. Communications Minister Richard Bruton has allocated €119 million to delivering the €6 billion rural broadband scheme next year. Much of the funding that is being set aside for 2020 is likely to be spent rolling out 319 broadband connection points (BCPs) across the country.
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » I doubt Marlow is speaking for Imagine.
KOR101 wrote: » @Marlow says the submissions were run by a law firm, and it does seem to be a planned move by many parties. But, really who knows about the legalities here.
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » Not necessarily. It could be a bizarre form of advertising by Imagine. It gets their brand mentioned regularly in the media at little extra expense.
clohamon wrote: » I’d definitely attend the court hearing if Sean Bolger would testify in person.
clohamon wrote: I’d definitely attend the court hearing if Sean Bolger would testify in person.
KOR101 wrote: » They've already made that calculation otherwise they would not have bothered with the submission.
westyIrl wrote: » Or have the pockets. It would be a financial decision more than anything else and it would be just Imagine delaying the inevitable in any case. i.e. where it would cost more in legal action than profits from retained customers, they'll fold.
Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: » When they ignore Imagine and the WISPs it will come down to whether either of them have the balls for legal action.
Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) I thank the Minister for outlining the nature and extent of that consultation. It is well recognised from different media reports that Imagine intends to cover approximately 234,000 premises in the intervention area. I understand Eir has already announced its intention to cover in the region of 80,000 homes in the intervention area. The Minister indicated that there have been 180 responses, but taking those two alone, we can estimate that of the order of 214,000 homes, farms and businesses will now be covered by commercial operators. The assumption must be that they would have to be excluded from the 540,000 premises already mapped. As a result of state aid rules, the Government will not be in a position to support the provision of broadband to those premises. That leaves 214,000 or so. If one divides that number into the €3 billion cost of the provision of the service, one arrives at a figure of approximately €13,000 per home. Will the Minister comment on that?Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) I will not comment on a hypothetical situation of the sort the Deputy outlined. As stated, any submission by any company - and I will not name companies - will be thoroughly evaluated. Companies will be evaluated against the criteria set out, including the need to hit the 30 Mb threshold, that they themselves are future-proofed and that they can guarantee to deliver to all those within the areas to which they lay claim high-speed broadband that is future-proofed and that will not be subject to diminution. They must also show that they have financial plans which show they are capable of delivering. Those are the criteria. I will not comment on individual applications and how they will be evaluated. That must be done properly. It will be done by the Department but the process is not yet complete.
wexfordman2 wrote: » This info is easily available to those in the industry, although no doubt there are a number of wisp sites that are not registered, either with comreg or indeed planning authorities, few and far between I would suggest.
2.b Wireless platforms: 1. Please provide the following data in a spreadsheet on a per sector basis: a. sector ID b. site IDc. site coordinates and projection systemd. sector azimuth . . j. tower or structure height (above ground level) k. transmit antenna height (reference base of antenna) . . t. spectrum licence conditions including ComReg licence reference number
recyclebin wrote: » I know it's not directly related the the NBP but Sky have settled there case with Comreg and Eir over the 170 euro connection fee. Anyone know what the outcome was? Comreg will release details soon either way.
