NBP part II

westyIrl · 15-11-2019 06:52PM

irishfeen wrote: »

Do we know how they actually intend in rolling out the network? As in will they try piggybacking on eir’s existing FTTH network, if they extended the eir’s network by even 2km they would catch a big proportion of premises.

I believe it will be a parallel build in most if not nearly all cases. One would imagine what you are saying would make more sense, especially in cases where only a few premises are encircled by Eir Rural FTTH. It will be after signing that information with regards to rollout timeline will be made available by NBI/Dept.

tsue921i8wljb3 · 15-11-2019 08:25PM

irishfeen wrote: »

Do we know how they actually intend in rolling out the network? As in will they try piggybacking on eir’s existing FTTH network, if they extended the eir’s network by even 2km they would catch a big proportion of premises.

They intend building from scratch from MANs and some eir exchanges. No reuse of existing eir 300k fibre.

SkepticQuark · 15-11-2019 08:25PM

Now we wait for Fine Gael to pick something else that's causing the delay in signing.

BArra · 15-11-2019 08:30PM

Marlow wrote: »

That's going to be a big question, I'm afraid. Because currently the NGA speeds required is 30 Mbit/s. If a premise gets removed, then it is because it already is serviced under those terms.

The 150M/30M specification (or more) is what has to be delivered when a premise is qualified for state aid under the NBP contract. But state aid can not be paid out for a premise, that already is covered within NGA requirements. It is against state aid rules.

As I stated. It's nothing against you. It's the principle of that such a statement is plain wrong and leaves a lot of room for misinterpretation. Even if you clarify yourself afterwards .. somebody may not read those clarifications.

Accuracy is important, when defining specifications.

/M

this has me worried, i am in a NBI area but serviced by a WISP who can provide usually 25-30Mbit/s during the daytime, but 7pm on the button then its down to 10Mbit/s, another few hours and its unable to stream 720p, always less than 5Mbit/s.

how can it be possible that they may remove premises on the NBI who like above can get the min req 30Mbit/s some of the time, but during the evening cannot?

Marlow · 15-11-2019 08:32PM

BArra wrote: »

this has me worried, i am in a NBI area but serviced by a WISP who can provide usually 25-30Mbit/s during the daytime, but 7pm on the button then its down to 10Mbit/s, another few hours and its unable to stream 720p, always less than 5Mbit/s.

how can it be possible that they may remove premises on the NBI who like above can get the min req 30Mbit/s some of the time, but during the evening cannot?

One provider covering you won't be enough. Has to be 2 indepenant ones and both at NGA speeds. There is also some additional specifications, that have to be met.

The final intervention map will tell.

/M

tsue921i8wljb3 · 15-11-2019 08:35PM

BArra wrote: »

this has me worried, i am in a NBI area but serviced by a WISP who can provide usually 25-30Mbit/s during the daytime, but 7pm on the button then its down to 10Mbit/s, another few hours and its unable to stream 720p, always less than 5Mbit/s.

how can it be possible that they may remove premises on the NBI who like above can get the min req 30Mbit/s some of the time, but during the evening cannot?

It's unlikely that any premises will be removed bar ones that eir may cover in urban areas as part of their build. Anything else is unfeasible really.

The Cush · 15-11-2019 09:09PM

Discussion on this earlier this evening on Ivan Yates's programme, it was pointed out in the discussion that the Commission has approved the plan up to €2.6bn and not the government's figure of €2.9bn.

Would it be safe to assume that this is due to a reduction in the number of premises in the intervention area, such as eir's urban rollout and the 30k-40k over the original rural 300k?

tsue921i8wljb3 · 15-11-2019 09:17PM

The Cush wrote: »

Discussion on this earlier this evening on Ivan Yates's programme, it was pointed out in the discussion that the Commission has approved the plan up to €2.6bn and not the government's figure of €2.9bn.

Would it be safe to assume that this is due to a reduction in the number of premises in the intervention area, such as eir's urban rollout and the 30k-40k over the original rural 300k?

It could be that or it could be this:

The overall capped subsidy is €2.9 billion which includes VAT of €355 million. In net terms, the maximum cost that could go to third party operators and the bidder is in the order of €2.6 billion. The €355 million in VAT would not leave the Department but would go straight to the Revenue Commissioners; therefore, the amount of the subsidy paid outside the Department is up to €2.6 billion.

I'm not sure how State Aid works in this instance.

The Cush · 15-11-2019 09:22PM

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

It could be that or it could be this:

That could be it too, the impression I got from the discussion they were assuming a reduction in the number of premises. Then again they are looking at the same info as the rest of us, we should know for sure in the coming weeks.

tsue921i8wljb3 · 15-11-2019 09:23PM

The Cush wrote: »

That could be it too, the impression I got from the discussion they were assuming a reduction in the number of premises. Then again they are looking at the same info as the rest of us, we should know for sure in the coming weeks.

Who was involved? Yates has no clue anyway.

The Cush · 15-11-2019 09:30PM

Emmanuel Lemon Louse wrote: »

Who was involved? Yates has no clue anyway.

Newstalk's tech person, Jess Kelly and Ivan's friend Paul Davis, the academic from DCU. The discusiion was on about 5:15pm

https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/highlights-from-the-hard-shoulder/will-nbp-contract-signed-imminently

Marlow · 15-11-2019 09:38PM

The whole VAT thing was always an excuse by politicians to play the figure down.

VAT only comes into play (effectively) when the end user is connected and is a completely different budget.

If you for example take SIROs build, VAT is not even charged/deducted when it comes to network build/installations until SIRO bills the provider for the final installation.

The reason for that, is that there is a different way of doing it in the construction industry and concessions to allow for VAT application to be postponed. But the average person would not know this.

It is most certainly a change in numbers somewhere. OpenEIR to be the contributing factor for the majority.

/M

BArra · 15-11-2019 09:52PM

Marlow wrote: »

One provider covering you won't be enough. Has to be 2 indepenant ones and both at NGA speeds. There is also some additional specifications, that have to be met.

The final intervention map will tell.

/M

oh dear, Imagine are also available to my home, so thats two WISPS. (With Nova) I better pray to the fiber gods that my area wont be removed from NBI

both of which through their literature say they can provide in excess of 30mbit/ or up to x Mbit/s rubbish, but in absolute reality they cannot after 7pm

ussjtrunks · 15-11-2019 09:56PM

I'm with Nova and get like 10mb at night I hope that doesnt exclude me and those like me from the NBP that would just be stupid

Ultimanemo · 15-11-2019 10:25PM

Marlow wrote: »

One provider covering you won't be enough. Has to be 2 indepenant ones and both at NGA speeds. There is also some additional specifications, that have to be met.

The final intervention map will tell.

/M

I have a problem with that, Both Airwire and Lightnet has my house covered on their maps, both came and failed to install, both said the signal is so poor and they can't install, still my house is covered on their maps.
Only Imagine covers my house but the speed is only good during the day, at night it is usually as below "direct cable connection and no Internet activity".

Johnboy1951 · 15-11-2019 10:43PM

ussjtrunks wrote: »

I'm with Nova and get like 10mb at night I hope that doesnt exclude me and those like me from the NBP that would just be stupid

With NBP fibre passing your door I doubt you could not be connected.

BArra · 15-11-2019 10:46PM

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

With NBP fibre passing your door I doubt you could not be connected.

Marlow has indicated that potentially if 2 NGA 'compliant' (:P :P

)WISPS are covering your area along with some further unspecified requirements that it may change the current NBP mapping areas to some degree

The issue myself and likely many others have is that they are covered by several WISPS who can offer NGA compliant speeds during the daylight hours, not so much during the twilight though and there is possible risk of being left out due to this

tsue921i8wljb3 · 15-11-2019 10:51PM

BArra wrote: »

Marlow has indicated that potentially if 2 NGA complaint WISPS are covering your area along with some further unspecified requirements that it may change the current NBP mapping areas to some degree

The issue myself and likely many others have is that they are covered by several WISPS who can offer NGA compliant speeds during the daylight hours, not so much during the twilight though and there is possible risk of being left out due to this

And there is absolutely no evidence that is going to happen. It was likely the tactic tried by the WISPs as they set fire to several thousand Euros hiring some UK consultant to tell them what they wanted to hear.

How could a fibre network be built where you would have a patchwork of premises removed as they are in WISP coverage. It doesn't make any sense.

Marlow · 15-11-2019 11:31PM

Ultimanemo wrote: »

I have a problem with that, Both Airwire and Lightnet has my house covered on their maps,

The maps may not reflect, what is covered.

Airwire for example have 2 maps: traditional and jet wireless. Only their Jet coverage is NGA compliant.

The next question then would be, if they were part of the providers, who submitted.

/M

Ultimanemo · 15-11-2019 11:54PM

Marlow wrote: »

The maps may not reflect, what is covered.

Airwire for example have 2 maps: traditional and jet wireless. Only their Jet coverage is NGA compliant.

The next question then would be, if they were part of the providers, who submitted.

/M

That is even better their jet coverage doesn't come anywhere near me, I actually contacted them "Before joining Imagine" if they have plans to cover our area with jet service, they said: never had never will
Even if you look at their jet coverage map it is like Swiss cheese, "credit to their honesty".
Airwire will be fine, they are already selling FTTH and they will do with NBP.

Imagine is the problem. They insist on their "5G" and "Fibre" both are snake oil products

ussjtrunks · 16-11-2019 04:13AM

I’m sure there are parts of america that get very good fixed wireless service, the main issue here is the fact that there just isn’t enough bandwidth being supplied to each tower to cater for the customers connected. In theory if each tower was connected directly to fibre the speeds would be a lot better as several towers aren’t using 1 towers fibre connection.

The service has potential to improve it’s just a question of how much it would cost and likely it probably would cost more than just rolling out fibre.

Falconire · 16-11-2019 04:57AM

ussjtrunks wrote: »

I’m sure there are parts of america that get very good fixed wireless service, the main issue here is the fact that there just isn’t enough bandwidth being supplied to each tower to cater for the customers connected. In theory if each tower was connected directly to fibre the speeds would be a lot better as several towers aren’t using 1 towers fibre connection.

The service has potential to improve it’s just a question of how much it would cost and likely it probably would cost more than just rolling out fibre.

Don't forget most of Rural america barley have phone coverage.

BarryM · 16-11-2019 10:06AM

Gary kk wrote: »

The current plan is provide 150mb not 30 mb

Thanks for that, I wonder when?:rolleyes:

But....seeing the amount of what might be called 'comment', in between the slagging, the meaning of the figure(s) is contested, or should I say contended?

The EU said 150, did they? I wonder who told them - I used to work for them, nobody writes anything down that they weren't told to write....

My question still stands, when?

naughto · 16-11-2019 10:16AM

With eu aid granted what’s next on this very slow process of signing the contract?

Gary kk · 16-11-2019 10:30AM

BarryM wrote: »

Thanks for that, I wonder when?:rolleyes:

But....seeing the amount of what might be called 'comment', in between the slagging, the meaning of the figure(s) is contested, or should I say contended?

The EU said 150, did they? I wonder who told them - I used to work for them, nobody writes anything down that they weren't told to write....

My question still stands, when?

Lol sorry i must be off my rocker just to quote that speed. Look i don't know.

The Cush · 16-11-2019 11:20AM

naughto wrote: »

With eu aid granted what’s next on this very slow process of signing the contract?

EU aid hasn't been granted, the Competition DG of the Commission has granted Ireland approval to fund the rollout of the NBP from its own resources and to award to contract to its preferred bidder.

The state has already sourced €500m of funding from the European Investment Bank for the NBP back in early 2018.

The Dept has said they are completing the financial and contractual due diligence work with the bidder prior to signing the contract, has this been completed, we're not sure. Speculation yesterday was the contract could be signed within the next 2 weeks and possibly approved at cabinet next Tuesday.

clohamon · 16-11-2019 11:26AM

The Cush wrote: »

EU aid hasn't been granted, the Competition DG of the Commission has granted Ireland approval to fund the rollout of the NBP from its own resources and to award to contract to its preferred bidder.

The state has already sourced €500m of funding from the European Investment Bank for the NBP back in early 2018.

The Dept has said they are completing the financial and contractual due diligence work with the bidder prior to signing the contract, has this been completed, we're not sure. Speculation yesterday was the contract could be signed within the next 2 weeks and possibly approved at cabinet next Tuesday.

I think the original grant (2012) of €75M from the European Regional Development Fund is still viable.

clohamon · 16-11-2019 11:33AM

The Regional Internet Service Providers Association (Rispa), the industry body that represents smaller rural wireless operators, says it is considering a legal challenge to the plan on state aid grounds, regardless of the commission’s view.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/european-commission-approves-ireland-s-3bn-broadband-plan-1.4083997

Looks like they've been notified that the map has not changed.

Johnboy1951 · 16-11-2019 12:17PM

Brussels said the scheme targeted areas where no broadband infrastructure offering download speeds of at least 30 megabits per second (Mbps) existed, and “where no private investor has demonstrated a concrete plan to invest commercially in the near future”.

I have not heard of the Wisps producing such a concrete plan, particularly one where they address the manner in which they would service those premises they presently cannot, due to physical constraints.

If they did research such a scheme I believe they would find it non-commercial, as the cost of providing service to those not presently serviced would be too much to bear.

BarryM · 16-11-2019 12:31PM

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I have not heard of the Wisps producing such a concrete plan, particularly one where they address the manner in which they would service those premises they presently cannot, due to physical constraints.

If they did research such a scheme I believe they would find it non-commercial, as the cost of providing service to those not presently serviced would be too much to bear.

Apropos, that is what I was referring to in my earlier posts. Again, being naive, my understanding of the NBP is that it was/is? designed to provide access to precisely those areas. 'Not presently' serviced seems to be a vague notion, as the amber area includes places where there is service, but not 'commercial' in NBP terms. We'll see sometime in the next x years.

NBP part II

Comments