Eircom 'holds up broadband access' - Leaked Government memo

spongebob

Adam,

She probably will be replaced as chair of the Commission at the beginning of November but does that mean (sez he hopefully) that she will also be replaced as a commissioner ?

I would personally like /me to be a commissioner and will apply for the job as soon as she vacates it. I hear her wheels are sound enough although I also heard that the wheels were a GIRLY colour so I may take umbrage at this chromatic slight and demand that they re-issue the wheelsto /me ....I would say that a Black X5 with Darkened Windows is what I have in mind as a statement of intent for my Commissionership-itude.

The job is easy for a talented person such as I , I just need a set of wheels with a good sound system to unwreck my head at the end of the day . Once I have performed my amazing Rentokil remedies I need to frighten Festy drivers off the road by coming up behind them with 500w of Sub Bass a rumbling outta me boot.

King Tubby and Augustus Pablo are most effective as a lane clearing measure at that wattage. Meanwhile the other commissioners simply sit it out in traffic waiting for the light to go green, its a karma thing lads innit .

M

dahamsta

I'll be applying too, although I'll be looking for a Fireblade, for that "with it" touch. I was going to go for a Ducati, but I thought that the maintenance costs might be a bit high for the operators liking. Still though, we can get the Fireblade ported and polished and give a little demonstration of speed to the Nifty-Fifty advocating middle-managers.

adam

SkepticOne

Originally posted by dahamsta
The problem I see is that nearly every operator and ISP in Ireland is dependant on Eircom and regulation to get by and get on; the only exception being EsatBT, who (in my view) have acted in concert with Eircom to hamper competition (albeit implictly). With that level of dependence, I'm not sure that <strike>weakening<strike> lessening regulation is a solution. I'm much more inclined to think that the solution isn't less or even more regulation, but better developed and applied regulation.

Again, you seem to have misunderstood what I said. I did not say we should weaken or lessen regulation.

What I said was that we should lessen our dependence on regulation. I hope you can see the difference. If you can't I am happy to explain.

nahdoic

Muck For Commissioner

nahdoic

oh damn. conflict of interest. adam for commissioner too.

dahamsta

Originally posted by SkepticOne
What I said was that we should lessen our dependence on regulation. I hope you can see the difference. If you can't I am happy to explain.

I don't see how we can lessen our dependence SkepticOne, but perhaps I'm missing the point entirely. I'd appreciate it if you'd explain.

adam

spongebob

I am now trending towards an electric blue with darkened windows ensemble since I saw this natty photo of a modded X5 Here , mmmmmmmmm yeah I can see my first 'decision notice' being written right now in the Comreg Chequebook .

Has she gone yet does anyone know or are they simply haggling about wheels and pensions at this stage ?

M

SkepticOne

Originally posted by dahamsta
I don't see how we can lessen our dependence SkepticOne, but perhaps I'm missing the point entirely. I'd appreciate it if you'd explain.

OK.

What passes for "competition" in the internet access market in Ireland is almost totally dependent on wholesale products from Eircom.

These wholesale products are dependent on regulation for their existance. ComReg will halt any Eircom retail product unless there is a corresponding wholesale product.

While this situation persists, the only innovation a company like UTV can do is provide extra mail boxes, web space or bundle their service with voice products in a variety of different ways.

However the fundamental aspects of the service (connection speed, contention ratio, etc.) they can't change by themselves.

Therefore, UTV while they are dependent on Eircom (and by extension regulation) cannot innovate in any significant way.

Consider, in contrast, NTL. While they are subject to regulation, they are not dependent on them. Therefore, it is simply a management decision to reduce prices or increase speeds (within technical constraints).

I'm just using NTL as an example here. My point is that it is the lack of companies that do not totally depend on regulation that drive innovation. Because we have not had much of this genuine competition, we have had little innovation, high prices and delay.

The problem is that cable companies are only in a few areas and the wireless companies are just starting off, but this is where the future lies.

dahamsta

Thanks for that SkepticOne. I hadn't really thought about competing platforms to be honest, mostly because at the moment they're not really competing. Cable certainly doesn't show up on my long distance radio, and although RF does seem to be going places, I'm not entirely sure where, when or how. We definitely need to see a consistent plan on wireless by the Government anyway, and I'm not seeing anything at all on this subject. (Perhaps IO is, I don't know.) And of course satellite is another competitor of sorts, although I think pricing will always be an issue.

All of which leaves me pretty much in the same place I was I'm afraid. The only viable platform at the moment is DSL, mostly via bitstream. I don't think regulation is holding RF back, and I'd be surprised if it was a factor in cable...

adam

SkepticOne

Originally posted by dahamsta
Thanks for that SkepticOne. I hadn't really thought about competing platforms to be honest, mostly because at the moment they're not really competing. Cable certainly doesn't show up on my long distance radio, and although RF does seem to be going places, I'm not entirely sure where, when or how.

I only used cable as an example. My point was that it was not dependent on regulation for its existance. The regulator could disappear tomorow and cable would continue to operate. Same with wireless. This is my point.

All of which leaves me pretty much in the same place I was I'm afraid. The only viable platform at the moment is DSL, mostly via bitstream.

But this forces you into the role of an Eircom pimp since they control all the DSL infrastructure. Without competing infrastructure we are condemned to rely on a regulator to do a job they are not suited for.

I don't think regulation is holding RF back, and I'd be surprised if it was a factor in cable...

Precicely why pushes need to be made in this direction (particularly wireless). Don't push against a brick wall unless you have to.

Da Man

Isn't Eircom the only company to really invest in broadband? If all the other players started building competing infrastructure (cable, wireless, whatever) then Eircom wouldn't be an issue any more. If broadband is so expensive here, surely a competitor should be able to make decent money on their investment? There may well be economy of scale reasons why telecoms products are relatively expensive here.

NTL seem to have their heads up their arses so I don't expect much from them, but these new wireless initiatives (Ripwave?) might spell the end of Eircom's reign. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if NTL is now accelerating broadband deployment because Eircom has proven that there is a market and is creating broadband awareness in Ireland.

dahamsta

I only used cable as an example. My point was that it was not dependent on regulation for its existance. The regulator could disappear tomorow and cable would continue to operate. Same with wireless. This is my point.

I thought the cable operators had contracts with Comreg like everyone else. If you mean cable Internet contracts, fair enough, but so what: there isn't any cable Internet to speak of. In this case, dependence on regulation - or the lack of it - has achieved nothing. Wireless proves nothing because nothing has been proven.

But this forces you into the role of an Eircom pimp since they control all the DSL infrastructure. Without competing infrastructure we are condemned to rely on a regulator to do a job they are not suited for.

But isn't this all acadamic? We don't have a competing infrastructure.

Precicely why pushes need to be made in this direction (particularly wireless). Don't push against a brick wall unless you have to.

But pushes have been made, a lot of the spectrum has been deregulated, and we're not seeing consistent results. In fact many wireless operators are shying away from the deregulated bands for fear of the noise they'll have to contend with...

I understand your point SkepicOne, but I don't understand the point. In my view we have to concentrate on what we've got, and all we've got right now is Eircom's infrastructure. Sure, we have to look ahead, but we also have to be pragmatic about what we've got now.

adam

SkepticOne

Originally posted by dahamsta
I thought the cable operators had contracts with Comreg like everyone else. If you mean cable Internet contracts, fair enough, but so what: there isn't any cable Internet to speak of. In this case, dependence on regulation - or the lack of it - has achieved nothing. Wireless proves nothing because nothing has been proven.

No. What I was trying to say was that cable operators do not depend on regulation in order to compete in the market.

Other companies like UTV, Netsorce totally depend on wholesale services mandated by ComReg. As such they can't innovate in any real way as I've already pointed out.

But isn't this all acadamic? We don't have a competing infrastructure.

Precicely why this is the area that needs to be pushed. I am repeating myself but sometimes that is necessary.

But pushes have been made, a lot of the spectrum has been deregulated, and we're not seeing consistent results. In fact many wireless operators are shying away from the deregulated bands for fear of the noise they'll have to contend with...

The argument you seem to be making is that because a certain push doesn't appear to be producing results that pushing in this direction is flawed.

I could give you loads of examples where regulatory intervention has not led to desired results. By your logic you would have to conclude that regulatory intervention is pointless.

I understand your point SkepicOne, but I don't understand the point.

I can only explain the point I am making. If you are having difficulty understanding 'the point' whatever that is then you will first have to state what you think 'the point' is. Then mayby I or someone else can help you.

In my view we have to concentrate on what we've got, and all we've got right now is Eircom's infrastructure. Sure, we have to look ahead, but we also have to be pragmatic about what we've got now.

This would be Eircom's view too. Eircom are the only people that should be doing broadband. There is no need for competition. There is already enough competition etc. etc.

I'm not arguing against pragmatism. We should simply recognise that the problems we have won't all be solved by regulatory change. The fundamental problem is not regulatory. Once that is realised then progress can be made.

Ripwave

Originally posted by dahamsta
I don't think regulation is holding RF back,

Spectrum regulation is a significant factor - we might see exactly how big a factor when the 3.5Ghz license are announced.

Ripwave

Originally posted by Da Man
If broadband is so expensive here, surely a competitor should be able to make decent money on their investment?

There is absolutely nothing to stop eircom charging the same as other european telcos tomorrow. So if you invest say €20 million over the next 12 months, and just as you're beginning to start generate cashflow, eircom decide to change their pricing model, you're screwed. You can't base a business plan on what eircom are changing today, unless you're a minnow that won't really challenge eircom. If you're big enough to challenge eircom, then you have to base your business plan on the absolute minimum that eircom might charge. (Which is one of the reasons that NTR/IBB's baseline price of €30 a month is so interesting).

There may well be economy of scale reasons why telecoms products are relatively expensive here.

Our relatively low population density is a significant factor - you know how much it costs to deliver USO to one off housing all over the countryside?