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

SIRO - ESB/Vodafone Fibre To The Home

hallo dare

Esb to provide areas with broadband, limited info to start with, but i for one am looking forward to higher speeds!!!

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0122/499525-esb-broadband/

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

norrie rugger wrote: »

For the greater good of the economy country needs a rural population, it's as simple as that. To get people to live rurally and do business there then the country needs to subsidise.

Yes Ireland needs a rural population.

What Ireland does NOT need is a rural population living in one off houses dispersed all over the countryside.

What Ireland needs is a rural population living in sustainable towns and villages. Just like is normal in most of rural Europe, where services like Broadband, Electricity, Water, Sewage, etc. can be delivered in an economically sustainable manner.

Irish planning law has failed us completely.

football_lover wrote: »

The original poster said it makes no sense to supply fiber to the rural communities because people in the urban area's are subsidizing rural systems.

Your post was totally ridiculous.

Cut off food supply and people in urban areas will simply buy it from Holland (we already are, see the 5c vegetables at Lidl/Aldi).

And then when the farmers of rural Ireland are out of work, how are they going to pay their wages and rent and bills, etc.?

As for power, it is almost all generated in or very near to the cities, electricity doesn't travel very well. Actually electricity generated near cities is usually then transferred to rural Ireland. Cut off the power and it is actually rural areas that would suffer brown outs.

Dublin currently doesn't get it's water from the Shannon. There is a plan to do it, but at the moment Dublin gets it's water from it's own region and supplies.

And if you are really going to go down this road, then it would mean Dublin would have far more tax money available to it, so it could use that money to build de-salination plants and become completely self sufficient.

Strictly speaking urban Ireland doesn't actually need rural Ireland. Now I'm not suggesting for a moment that we do anything like all I described above. But I'm only pointing out the economic reality of the situation. People in rural Ireland need to be realistic about the services that can be delivered economically to them.

football_lover

irishpancake wrote: »

I worked for eircom, as a Field Force Tech, up to 4 years ago, when I retired due to ill-health.

I dispute your allegation here....there was no crazy money paid to eircom staff, quite then contrary.

Wages there were quite low, comparatively speaking, and there was a policy of non-payment for extra time worked, this was given as time-off in lieu, on a 50/50 basis....you only got paid for 50% of the time worked, if you worked outside normal hours.

We were, as you know, the subject of a crazy privatisation policy, and were sold and re-sold again, in deals which were designed to give the maximum return to those buying the crippled company, with debt raised by the Company, leaving it totally over-burdened with debt, which was then asset stripped and left to the Vulture Capitalists, and I include the ESOP in this, who did manage to acquire a significant shareholding for the Employees, which is now gone.

I sincerely hope that ESB is not being lined up to receive the eircom treatment, as in this Country, making the same mistakes over and over seems to be the norm.

There is nothing wrong with privatization when it is done properly. There is a big issue with state assets being Privatized as they have been set up with taxation based funds.

There there is also the issue of the infrastructure at present having an unfair advantage in the market place and no competitor can enter.

football_lover

SpaceTime wrote: »

There really needs to be some kind of legislation put in place at EU level to prevent what happened to eircom happening to any company really. It's ridiculous to allow investors to do those kinds of 'leveraged buy outs'.

Privatisation is one thing, but that kind of speculative activity isn't healthy and really needs much tighter regulation to prevent further problems in future.

The financial sector really needs to be brought very firmly into line. Between this kind of thing and the bailouts of banks due to their business models etc.. It's just all gone way too far.
The whole sector needs to be brought firmly back into line.

I am not a fan of regulating the market place because it always has unintended consequences such as raising prices or making it difficult for new players to enter the market place and as such protecting existing monopoly's.

On the other hand Eircom is based on an infrastructure that was started by tax payers money so there is a common national interest in Eircom.

football_lover

MrO wrote: »

This makes absolutely no sense...at all.

People in the country *allow* food to be sold cheap? This is nonsense, food producers like any business try to get the best possible rate they can for their products - they don't allow food to be sold cheap so that the slickers can eat well.

Stop water? I don't know where to start with this one.

'Block' power stations? Again...where to start, have you any idea what that would mean? Have you actually thought about it?

You're certainly not speaking for rural Ireland.

The original poster said it makes no sense to supply fiber to the rural communities because people in the urban area's are subsidizing rural systems.

And I pointed out that this works in two direction. Food is produced in the country side and then shipped to the urban area's.

I have also said that people in the countryside and coasts would not raise prices but they could if they so desired if the urban area people start mess with us such as blocking modern communications systems.

If we want the best food standards then a modern fiber optics based rural system is the answer combined with a good wireless system such as LTE.

There is no point people in the countryside paying taxes and getting very little in return for there taxes.

Any national fiber optics system should start with the area's that are white spots and build infrastructure there.

Even if it costs more. You mention water by the way then maybe people in the countryside should consider blocking the Shannon water to Dublin plan.

SpaceTime

In theory efibre is modular. Once you've fibres running to the village or group of houses you can install a cabinet.

Bear in mind eircom has many, many tiny exchanges that are really about as significant as one e fibre cabinet anyway. Many of them are actually housed in cabinets. The voice network uses remote exchanges linked (usually by fibre) to a parent exchange. It's like a 1980s/90s version of efibre. Similar layout. The ADSL services are similarly distributed and can be located in a small cabinet connected back to the main exchange in an area.

All they need to do is upgrade the fibre links and add one or two VDSL2 cabinets and a village has e-fibre. They'd be hosted at a major exchange not at the local tiny one.

The system is totally modular.

It can't address the problem in ribbon developments and scattered housing though. The technology isn't suitable.

Again, I think we need to urgently look at very good wireless services to serve those kinds of homes.

ted1

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Not true. I just checked this last night. A town close to were i live is going live with EFibre this June. Population 1100

I live in a village close by around 8km away and Eircom has planned for my village to get Efibre by July 2016.

Population of my village 676 people. I thought it was more, but i was wrong.

Eircom, is willing to do it why not the ESB!

Villages with lots of houses and small town villages i bet is what ESB will be targeting first.

Haha come back to me in 2016...,,

irishpancake

norrie rugger wrote: »

So they should not be hooked up to the water/electricity networks then either?

Yeah, everyone should live in high-rise apartment blocks, it's so much more socially progressive :eek:

Lovely East-German style workers and peasant dwellings, last forever they will....

just like Ballymun Towers....

wasn't it Rural, lot's of fields and pheck all else.....just name them after the "heroes of the revolution"...that'll make it OK!!!

SpaceTime

There really needs to be some kind of legislation put in place at EU level to prevent what happened to eircom happening to any company really. It's ridiculous to allow investors to do those kinds of 'leveraged buy outs'.

Privatisation is one thing, but that kind of speculative activity isn't healthy and really needs much tighter regulation to prevent further problems in future.

The financial sector really needs to be brought very firmly into line. Between this kind of thing and the bailouts of banks due to their business models etc.. It's just all gone way too far.
The whole sector needs to be brought firmly back into line.

norrie rugger

Sell the licences to run the networks but never the networks.

Infrastructure will only ever be upgraded based on profit, if privately owned.
If state owned, the upgrades are based on the needs of the country.

That is the lesson that I hope will be learned, from the Telecom Eireann sale.

irishpancake

SpaceTime wrote: »

Regardless of the internal machinations of ESB's union politics and pay rates, the fact remains it has a history of actually getting big, complicated infrastructure rolled out rather effectively and efficiently.

I would have quite a bit of confidence that ESB could get this network rolled out rather effectively and rapidly once they sign off on a design.

I was impressed with the speed of Eircom's FTTC rollout once they got rolling. It's the first time I've seen Eircom doing anything on that scale so quickly and effectively. The last time that they were doing something as large as that was probably as a semi-state in the 1980s when they pretty much rebuilt the voice network. Since then, most of the infrastructure just saw incremental updates.

You are on the button here my friend, if you only knew just how correct that is, bolded above. We, Telecom/eircom had a very good reputation, as a semi-state company, and we did deliver a state-of -the art digital voice network, and then, everyone knows what happened...

the vultures descended, investment dried up, the debt was ramped up, so the vultures could be fed, including those home-grown vultures we bred ourselves.

A salutary lesson for all, including this Government and ESB....don't do it again.

norrie rugger

For the greater good of the economy country needs a rural population, it's as simple as that. To get people to live rurally and do business there then the country needs to subsidise.

The water and electricity points (although badly made) have merit. Power lines and water pipes need to be constructed and maintained into cities. Why should people living near to the source have to pay the same as those in cities, given water loss and substation requirements?
Because the country needs as much utility coverage as possible to allow for business to thrive, wherever that may be.

irishpancake

ED E wrote: »

It would appear you have an axe to grind here, I wasnt moaning. Eircom Field Techs get paid crazy money too. Thats ireland for you. Simply pointing out that it makes no sense for ESB to use their own staff for a more trivial role. They're heavily trained and follow very strict procedures, rightly so, and should be left to maintaining the grid.

I worked for eircom, as a Field Force Tech, up to 4 years ago, when I retired due to ill-health.

I dispute your allegation here....there was no crazy money paid to eircom staff, quite then contrary.

Wages there were quite low, comparatively speaking, and there was a policy of non-payment for extra time worked, this was given as time-off in lieu, on a 50/50 basis....you only got paid for 50% of the time worked, if you worked outside normal hours.

We were, as you know, the subject of a crazy privatisation policy, and were sold and re-sold again, in deals which were designed to give the maximum return to those buying the crippled company, with debt raised by the Company, leaving it totally over-burdened with debt, which was then asset stripped and left to the Vulture Capitalists, and I include the ESOP in this, who did manage to acquire a significant shareholding for the Employees, which is now gone.

I sincerely hope that ESB is not being lined up to receive the eircom treatment, as in this Country, making the same mistakes over and over seems to be the norm.

MrO

football_lover wrote: »

Well that game can go two directions. Why should people in the country allow food to be sold cheap to the towns.

We can always raise the price of food. But people in the country side or coast do not do this.

There are many things we could do in the country side that would make life very difficult for the cities.

We could also stop water being pumped from the country side to the cities and also block the power stations in the country side.

Ireland is a socialist country were it is expected that when people in the country side pay into the system there would be a return.

Trust me food is a lot tastier than fiber optics.

This makes absolutely no sense...at all.

People in the country *allow* food to be sold cheap? This is nonsense, food producers like any business try to get the best possible rate they can for their products - they don't allow food to be sold cheap so that the slickers can eat well.

Stop water? I don't know where to start with this one.

'Block' power stations? Again...where to start, have you any idea what that would mean? Have you actually thought about it?

You're certainly not speaking for rural Ireland.

Mr. G

MrO wrote: »

Eircom is not bringing fibre to the home.

Not yet. There is no evidence to say they won't, they are only trialling it in a small number of places. So technically they already do FTTH, just not on a mass scale.

MrO

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Eircom, is willing to do it why not the ESB!

Villages with lots of houses and small town villages i bet is what ESB will be targeting first.

Eircom is not bringing fibre to the home.

norrie rugger

ted1 wrote: »

But really why should others subsidise the added cost if supplying connections to people who chose to live in remote areas. A block of apartments in Dublin can contain 650 people and probably involve a run if 100m where's as the one in Clare would involve running a cable several km along with the added infrastructure needed to cover this distance

So they should not be hooked up to the water/electricity networks then either?

football_lover

Chris The Hacker wrote: »

A socialist country where the means of production are mostly owned by private owners?

If you use the dictionary definition then Ireland is not a socialist country not that I am a fan of socialism just being realistic.

What you are referring to is a socialist economy.

Ireland as a country is managed mostly from the center and that comes down right to the setting of wage standards.

My point to the original comment was to do with the fact that rural have a right to this as they are producing most of the countries food and they are also paying taxes to support the system but they get very little return for this.

Chris The Hacker

football_lover wrote: »

Ireland is a socialist country were it is expected that when people in the country side pay into the system there would be a return.

A socialist country where the means of production are mostly owned by private owners?

bealtine

irishpancake wrote: »

We live in a black-spot here, as far as BB or even Mobile masts, you don't have to be in Kerry!!!

There are so many places like this in Ireland, villages of 200-500, who are being told, use the NBS....what a joke.

Wait didn't you get the memo? Everybody in Ireland now has access to basic broadband...that's the official line nowadays...

football_lover

ted1 wrote: »

But really why should others subsidise the added cost if supplying connections to people who chose to live in remote areas. A block of apartments in Dublin can contain 650 people and probably involve a run if 100m where's as the one in Clare would involve running a cable several km along with the added infrastructure needed to cover this distance

Well that game can go two directions. Why should people in the country allow food to be sold cheap to the towns.

We can always raise the price of food. But people in the country side or coast do not do this.

There are many things we could do in the country side that would make life very difficult for the cities.

We could also stop water being pumped from the country side to the cities and also block the power stations in the country side.

Ireland is a socialist country were it is expected that when people in the country side pay into the system there would be a return.

Trust me food is a lot tastier than fiber optics.

irishpancake

bk wrote: »

I'm sure they would trial it. Rumour has it they are even trailing it at the moment.

However if you are paying for it yourself, expect the bill to be thousands, not hundreds!

Just going through the thread, not sure if this has been mentioned, but what do folks think will be the impact of whatever is planned on those unfortunates, like me, who live in one of the designated so-called NBS areas.....

which of course, I don't use at all, preferring the relative assurance of ADSL from Voda/eircom, (I get around 1.6Mbps, steady, all the time, and even Netflix streams fine, without buffering, on my TV App).

If this could be provided to my rural, North Westmeath Village, [not far from Cavan]..... however, by wireless, with the fibre backhaul, or whatever, it would be fantastic....

We live in a black-spot here, as far as BB or even Mobile masts, you don't have to be in Kerry!!!

There are so many places like this in Ireland, villages of 200-500, who are being told, use the NBS....what a joke.

who do I need to bribe???

Who do I send the Brown Envelope to??

Grab All Association

Holycross is getting efibre and its a village with 700 people.

Cheerful Spring

ted1 wrote: »

Look it lets be honest it makes no financial sense to run cables to remote parts if the country for 650 people. When people choose to live in remote locations they should weigh up the pros and cons.

Not true. I just checked this last night. A town close to were i live is going live with EFibre this June. Population 1100

I live in a village close by around 8km away and Eircom has planned for my village to get Efibre by July 2016.

Population of my village 676 people. I thought it was more, but i was wrong.

Eircom, is willing to do it why not the ESB!

Villages with lots of houses and small town villages i bet is what ESB will be targeting first.

galait

Nody wrote: »

Very unlikely; wave one would likely be 4k+ villages and then they would work down from there basically in village sizes.

are you saying villages with a population over 4 thousand ???? Most villages in Ireland have populations of less than 100

Nody

galait wrote: »

Without reading the thread and getting my hopes up can I get a yes or no answer to my question.

I live in a rural area but the Electricity Cables are underground , Does this rule me out of any POTENTIAL Broadband service from the ESB?

Very unlikely; wave one would likely be 4k+ villages and then they would work down from there basically in village sizes.

murphaph

ted1 wrote: »

But really why should others subsidise the added cost if supplying connections to people who chose to live in remote areas. A block of apartments in Dublin can contain 650 people and probably involve a run if 100m where's as the one in Clare would involve running a cable several km along with the added infrastructure needed to cover this distance

I agree in principle with what you're saying but if anything in an Irish context 650 people living in a village is sustainable development. Fibre should be run to such villages IMO. It's the one off dwellers that should be left with wireless really.

The Cush

According to the Dáil debate on this last Wednesday the ESB JV's plan is to provide it on a wholesale-only basis to other providers

This from Pat Rabbitte contribution to the Dáil debate

The ESB has identified an opportunity to use its electricity distribution network to provide telecommunications services in the Irish market. I understand the company has sought a joint venture partner with a view to providing such services on a wholesale-only basis. I am advised that this, in turn, could facilitate the delivery of high speed broadband services by retail telecommunications operators in the areas served.

...

I understand from it that it is considering proposals to provide such services on a wholesale, open access basis with a joint venture partner. In August 2012 the company launched a call for expressions of interest in such a joint venture, attracting considerable interest from the telecommunications sector. I await with interest detailed formal proposals from it on the proposed joint venture.

...

The current proposal differs from the ESB's existing fibre network in that it would be a stand-alone business, with no direct connection to the management of the electricity network, and it might be developed by way of a joint venture.

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2014012200045?opendocument#TT00400

garroff

Quite the opposite.
ESB will bring BB all rural customers.
Remember...this is a political decision.

chrislynch8

To the best of my knowledge. The ESB are going to sell as an ISP to areas that would already have broadband. They are not going to bring fibre to places with less then 2000 or so people. I might be wrong but it will be the same as when BT entered the market. I don't see much change coming for smaller rural areas.

MrO

ted1 wrote: »

But really why should others subsidise the added cost if supplying connections to people who chose to live in remote areas. A block of apartments in Dublin can contain 650 people and probably involve a run if 100m where's as the one in Clare would involve running a cable several km along with the added infrastructure needed to cover this distance

I agree with you. There are obvious pros and cons to living in an urban setting and the same goes for rural. Most people understand this - some don't...