Prime Time tonight

spongebob

scargill wrote:

why didn't he say only half of their customers could get broadband ?????

This is an important distinction. Many Eircom customers in city centres have MULTIPLE lines while rural domestic customers have one line.

The Eircom SEC filing that was dissected by Viking some time back proved (roughly) that

60% of lines are connected to Enabled Exchanges , 30% of THOSE fail so about 45% of Eircom LINES can get BB at present .

Many of these lines are multiple lines into ONE customer . The number of Eircom CUSTOMERS who can get BB is CONSIDERABLY less than 45%.

The corollary is that many of the customers in city centres whose line failed a BB test can try another line, only one of the multiple lines has to pass

Explaining any of this to our soi-disant tech journalist is a waste of time...bar honourable mentions like Adrian Weckler ,Fergus Cassidy , John Kennedy (is that it) in Siicon Republic and Karlin ......and they are in alphabetic order by first name . The rest will simply regurgitate whatever Eircom tells them .

So I fear will Dempsey.

M

eircomtribunal

scargill wrote:

80% of 70% is 56% ?????? why didn't he say only half of their customers could get broadband ?????

Because David McRedmond is not an ordinary liar, but a highly paid master of deception.
What will stick in viewers minds? "70%" and "8 out of 10" can have broadband. (David can always claim he never said this straight lie, but that is exactly what he intended and managed to get across.)

While even "70%" or "8 out of 10" bb availability would be embarrassingly low and not bring us to the EU average bb availability, the true figure is lower than the 56%.
In their SEC filing (that's where Eircom cannot lie, because David could go to jail if found out) Eircom speaks of 1.1 million lines originating from enabled exchanges and 76% of those being bb capable: 1.1 million lines represent 68% of their lines and 76% of those makes some 52% of lines, according to Eircom's own figures.
As Muck points out, lines are not equal to customers. Less than half of the customers can get broadband.

Why have we to speculate about these figures?
Because our shell-shocked Regulator does not dare to publish anything of importance that could embarrass Eircom or himself. First degree of Stockholm syndrome.

P.

gline

eircomtribunal wrote:

Because David McRedmond is not an ordinary liar, but a highly paid master of deception.
What will stick in viewers minds? "70%" and "8 out of 10" can have broadband. (David can always claim he never said this straight lie, but that is exactly what he intended and managed to get across.)

While even "70%" or "8 out of 10" bb availability would be embarrassingly low and not bring us to the EU average bb availability, the true figure is lower than the 56%.
In their SEC filing (that's where Eircom cannot lie, because David could go to jail if found out) Eircom speaks of 1.1 million lines originating from enabled exchanges and 76% of those being bb capable: 1.1 million lines represent 68% of their lines and 76% of those makes some 52% of lines, according to Eircom's own figures.
As Muck points out, lines are not equal to customers. Less than half of the customers can get broadband.

Why have we to speculate about these figures?
Because our shell-shocked Regulator does not dare to publish anything of importance that could embarrass Eircom or himself. First degree of Stockholm syndrome.

P.

Yep eircoms use of those statistics is definitly hiding something.

Paddy20

Hey! Martin,

You do scrub up well, what a difference a suit makes Eh Very well done, ye did us proud ye scallywag ya.

Paddy.

gline

Paddy20 wrote:

Hey! Martin,

You do scrub up well, what a difference a suit makes Eh Very well done, ye did us proud ye scallywag ya.

Paddy.

LOL

spongebob

I shall defer to the maestro. 52% of Eircom lines are capable of being connected to Broadband not 45% . Slightly more than half not slightly less than half

A lot less than half the customers though Muck would guesstimate about 40%

M

eircomtribunal

Jimeatsmenu wrote:

Eircom guy : "70% of areas are broadband capable, and in those areas 8 out of 10 people can get broadband.

70% of areas – that's what David McRedmond says on public TV, without getting challenged. Isn't that the moment when our geographic coverage map could come in handy?

P.

spongebob

Exactly.

When McRedmond wants to prattle on to the thicko journos about Areas it Actually amounts to 201 out of 1100 exchanges or 18.3% of Areas . BB ultimately has to be provided OUT OF an exchange .

Given that many of these areas overlap in the 5 big cities where half of the enabled exchanges are it amounts to something like 10% Geographic coverage in reality .

The only truism is that 70% of Lines are in Enabled Areas .......not that they can actually get it if they want.....be they within the DSL coverage limit of 4.5km or not.

The SEC filing is gospel because McRedmond could be personally extradited to the US and locked up if it was not. He has no such legal duty to Eircoms customers or to Comreg .

M

jmcc

Muck wrote:

Explaining any of this to our soi-disant tech journalist is a waste of time...bar honourable mentions like Adrian Weckler ,Fergus Cassidy , John Kennedy (is that it) in Siicon Republic and Karlin ......and they are in alphabetic order by first name . The rest will simply regurgitate whatever Eircom tells them .

Weckler is a useless tosser who is just ignored by the industry. Fergus has a lot of respect from the more clueful but is ignored by the broader audience. John Kennedy will run stories even at the risk of them getting spiked. Karlin has come a long way since she and the rest of the Irish Times "technology journalists" ran Eircom's press releases verbatim even when they were clearly demonstrated as being lies. The big problem in this is that none of the above could actually match a story planted by a good Eircom PR operator.

The Primetime segment was unusual in that McRedmond did not have things his own way and the RTE interviewer caught McRedmond a few times. You could see the look of fear in McRedmond's eyes and the stress as he was lying about the report on the state of Eircom's infrastructure.

No doubt over the next few days there will be more spin from that Gombeen Man O'Reilly's newspapers and friends about what a great job Eircom is doing. If the gloves are going to come off, Ireland Offline has to hit every Eircom lie hard and call them lies. PR people have a rather delicate view of themselves and destroying that view and their credibility is the best way to handle them. The only paper that has consistently fought against Eircom's lies has been the Sunday Business Post. Having RTE on board is a good thing.

Regards...jmcc

Blaster99

Has it occurred to anyone that it might make sense to ask Eircom to remove the line test and just attempt to install RADSL on any line connected to an enabled exchange? For all this talk of coverage, it's Eircom that has limited the coverage by setting the bar too high.

Eurorunner

jmcc wrote:

Weckler is a useless tosser who is just ignored by the industry. ....................................... The only paper that has consistently fought against Eircom's lies has been the Sunday Business Post. Having RTE on board is a good thing.

Regards...jmcc

Dont know much about the guy but he did give the issue some press before many of the other journalists got a hold of it. If you think about it, the momentum has built from then till now in terms of press coverage.
The only ones not to cover the issue now are regional papers/radio - although martin harran has already got a start on this in donegal.
Im not just thinking in terms of eircom bashing, im thinking that the group broadband schemes could do with more press too.

And yes the Business Post has provided the best coverage of eircom, but that all started off with Adrian Wecklers article some months back.

jmcc

Eurorunner wrote:

Dont know much about the guy but he did give the issue some press before many of the other journalists got a hold of it.

Like fsck he did. Other journos were working on this before him and highlighted it better. The real jouros on the SBP did the work. A lot of real journos covered the Eircom fiasco in the mainstream press well before Weckler had left that Hoson rag Call Centre News and decided to be a "technology journalist" like all the other dot.bomb "technology journalists".

The only ones not to cover the issue now are regional papers/radio - although martin harran has already got a start on this in donegal.
Im not just thinking in terms of eircom bashing, im thinking that the group broadband schemes could do with more press too.

The regional papers are always more conservative and Eircom will know it has lost the war when they turn against it. (Regional papers are not known for hard hitting investigative journalism. Their main content is primarily Sports, Births, Marriages, Deaths and Local Adverts.) The Primetime segment will have an effect though most of the editorials over the next few weeks will be on the US Election and probably the IRA Decommissioning when it happens. The local radio stations would be the most useful to get in on the Group Broadband Scheme.

And yes the Business Post has provided the best coverage of eircom.

Editorial cut/fact check. I don't regard Weckler as being either a good "technology journalist" or a good editor and he certainly was not responsible for the mainstream press covering the story - especially when the mainstream press has been covering the Eircom story for years.

Regards...jmcc

seamus

Keep it on topic please guys.

Take it to another thread if you don't like Weckler jmcc, it's not relevant.

thejollyrodger

Watched the broadband part in PrimeTime. It sort of covered everything and didnt go into too much detail. Glad to see that the government has admitted that it was a mistake to sell Telecom Eireann since the private sector may not always follow suit in what the government wants.

I still think Comreg doesnt have enough power. And the price of unbundling of the local loop is still too high. It is the highest in Europe and is bound to stop Telcos from upgrading them.

Happy enough though with the future development of broadband in Ireland, I think the penny has finally dropped with the government. I just hope that Dempsy gets on with it. He should now get Comreg to start pushing ADSL2 now and also that fast wireless service @ 30 meg

jmcc

seamus wrote:

Keep it on topic please guys.
Take it to another thread if you don't like Weckler jmcc, it's not relevant.

However pointing out that the mainstream press has been covering the Eircom problem is relevant. Weckler is not the reason that the SBP decided suddenly to cover it. There is only a limited amount of space in any newspaper and specifically in the business section. The details are the things that will bring Eircom management to justice. However presenting these details in a simple enough format for the public is difficult and most "technology journalists" are not up to doing that because the arguments are often boringly technical. It takes a television programme like Primetime to kick the issue into the public consciousness.

Ireland Offline has to build upon that. The way it should be done is that every Eircom lie should be confronted and slammed as a lie. To paraphrase "The Untouchables" - they issue a press release, you issue a fact sheet pointing out the lies. Technology journalists are easily bought by companies such as Eircom. All they do is send them off on a junket or send them freebies.

Regards...jmcc

dahamsta

Have to say, while I appreciate that Prime Time coverage on this topic may be progress, it could easily be argued that allowing McFibber to peddle his trash uncontested could well do more harm than good. If I was IrelandOffline (smart comments welcome) I'd be encouraging the membership to write a note congratulating PT with one sentence, and then laying into them big time for not challenging McBullshot directly on the McGarbage he's been McSpouting.

In fact this should happen every time the subject comes up, particularly if an operator, ComReg or the Minister (i.e. The Enemy) are involved. Laying into the ST via the membership worked well for IrelandOffline, we took over their letters page the following week. And if something works well, keep doing it! Leverage the grassroots. Don't just expect the membership to do it, tell them to do it, with a dedicated thread for each piece. Even one hammering a week would be nice.

adam

eircomtribunal

dahamsta wrote:

In fact this should happen every time the subject comes up, particularly if an operator, ComReg or the Minister (i.e. The Enemy) are involved. Laying into the ST via the membership worked well for IrelandOffline, we took over their letters page the following week. And if something works well, keep doing it! Leverage the grassroots. Don't just expect the membership to do it, tell them to do it, with a dedicated thread for each piece. Even one hammering a week would be nice.
adam

Agreed.
What's the contact address for Prime Time?

P.

damien

dahamsta wrote:

Have to say, while I appreciate that Prime Time coverage on this topic may be progress, it could easily be argued that allowing McFibber to peddle his trash uncontested could well do more harm than good.

Did you watch the report ? Did you listen to what Donogh Diamond reported ? To compare the PT bit to the ass kissing piece in the Sunday Times is highly insulting to the hard work and almost perfect research that Prime Time put into their piece.

That Prime Time piece was not in any way like the Sunday Times piece. They allowed Eircom to have their say (fair reporting) and also brought IrelandOffline in to have their say and also ComReg. In fact IrelandOffline got the first soundbite. While they did not lay into McRedmond they still dished out fact after damning fact about Eircom. They even brought in the Pittsburgh report. You could literally see McRedmond flustered.

So no they didn't lay into McRedmond, Miriam instead layed into the bigger fish - Minister Noel Dempsey. The buck stops with him in the end. They got him to actually admit that things were crap and the sale of Eircom was a mistake. Getting the Govt to admit that blunder is pretty monumental to say the least.

There is no way it can be argued that the piece on Prime Time last night did more harm than good just because McRedmond had his soundbites aired. Not when before and after said soundbites PT showed us real facts. Sending an email with one line of praise and then a few paragraphs "laying into them" is not fair for the work they did. I'm all for constructive criticism and educating reporters but would such an email really be constructive ? Highlight where they did good and where they need work. One sentence will not in my opinion cover the good work they did last night.

Also Adam if you re-read through this thread you will see that I did suggest to people to email Prime Time with their thoughts on the piece. IrelandOffline have consistently encouraged the members of this forum and the memberhsip in general to do this since it came out of the dark a while back.

dahamsta

Jesus Damien, between your diatribe on Pana in the Cork forum and this I'm beginning to wonder about your mental health. Chill out guy, unpick the knots in your knickers...

The fact remains that McRedmond was allowed parrot his bull, again, and that should be addressed. And I'm perfectly aware that you asked people to contact PT, I'm simply suggesting that you make this an integral part of IrelandOffline's campaign. Involving the members more was supposed to be the whole point of the "new" IrelandOffline, remember?

Don't fall into the traditional IrelandOffline trap of taking all criticism negatively. If you do, you'll fall into all of the other traps too.

adam

sceptre

Calm, deep breaths. There's rightness[1] in what both of you have said.

I want to see this stuff aired, even if McRedmond gets that right to reply that we've so often not received. Give him enough rope and he'll do himself in, slick or not.


[1]May have made that word up

jmcc

damien.m wrote:

Did you watch the report ? Did you listen to what Donogh Diamond reported ? To compare the PT bit to the ass kissing piece in the Sunday Times is highly insulting to the hard work and almost perfect research that Prime Time put into their piece.

The easiest way to get the work PT put in dismissed is by doing the usual readers' letters crank job. It has to be handled better. Ideally by quoting from the Pittsburgh report and presenting Eircom's shareholders as being a bunch of grubby thieves that plundered the Irish comms infrastructure. The PT interview was very good because it caught McRedmond - not an easy thing to do.

While they did not lay into McRedmond they still dished out fact after damning fact about Eircom. They even brought in the Pittsburgh report. You could literally see McRedmond flustered.

From that point on, McRedmond started to sound like any other Eircom PR flunkie trying to deny that the infrastructure is screwed.

So no they didn't lay into McRedmond, Miriam instead layed into the bigger fish - Minister Noel Dempsey. The buck stops with him in the end. They got him to actually admit that things were crap and the sale of Eircom was a mistake. Getting the Govt to admit that blunder is pretty monumental to say the least.

To see that admission of guilt was the best part of the segment. Though interestingly there was no panel discussion. Did McRedmond or Eircom refuse to send anyone?

I'm all for constructive criticism and educating reporters but would such an email really be constructive ? Highlight where they did good and where they need work. One sentence will not in my opinion cover the good work they did last night.

Reporters need information. Praise is nice but the best way of handling this is to provide reporters with examples and where possible, good graphics. Readers Letters are hardly ever read by readers.

Regards...jmcc

eircomtribunal

damien.m wrote:

Miriam instead layed into the bigger fish - Minister Noel Dempsey. The buck stops with him in the end. They got him to actually admit that things were crap and the sale of Eircom was a mistake. Getting the Govt to admit that blunder is pretty monumental to say the least.

And fair play to PT and Dempsey.
To have the right hindsight is a much better starting point than staying in denial.


A good contrast to Dermot Ahern's last interview with "Irish Computer", October 2004:

Q: The sale of the eircom network infrastructure, with the sale of eircom has been viewed by some as a poor decision by the Government... In hindsight, do you think that the Government should have held onto the network infrastructure, and sold eircom separately?

D.Ahern: The sale of eircom rose in excess of five billion punts – most of it has gone to provide pensions in the future. I believe that is a wise investment. I believe that money will serve a great purpose. Obviously we would not have raised that amount of money if we did not sell the network...

P.

Paddy20

Goodness, "The sale of Eircom was a bad decision" Eh, The way things are heading, they will agree with Paddy20 next ?.. Heh HEEEHEE

Blaster99

Remind me again what state owned telco is delivering quality services to its customers/victims? Telecom Eireann was a certified joke, it seemed to be mostly an excuse to employ people. TE had the highest number employees per subscriber line in Europe and obviously the worst service. There was never anything wrong with selling off TE and raise some cash and get somebody to try to sort out that basket case. The problem was/is the lack of competition and regulation.

Paddy20

I am referring to the old P&T [Post & Telegraph]. If the people still owned that state owned public service utilities set up. It would have caught up long ago, and neither would be like the current fiasco's that they have become.

The citizens of Ireland were conned and robbed.

Slutmonkey57b

Paddy20 wrote:

I am referring to the old P&T [Post & Telegraph]. If the people still owned that state owned public service utilities set up. It would have caught up long ago, and neither would be like the current fiasco's that they have become.

The citizens of Ireland were conned and robbed.

For conning and robbing, I refer you to TE's property deals of the 80's and 90's (think 9.4m for the site in ballsbridge). Think of all the useless property bought by the state to fund the TE pension fund and appease the unions. Selling the company was the quickest way to break that problem, and if lessons had been learned from the breakup of BT then none of our current problems would be an issue. The fall came when the regulator failed to enforce, and the Valentia/TE pensions fund illegal buyout was approved.

thegills

Has anybody got a copy of this discussion that is considerably smaller than the 45MB currently available on this thread?
thegills

seamus

Blaster99 wrote:

Remind me again what state owned telco is delivering quality services to its customers/victims? Telecom Eireann was a certified joke, it seemed to be mostly an excuse to employ people. TE had the highest number employees per subscriber line in Europe and obviously the worst service. There was never anything wrong with selling off TE and raise some cash and get somebody to try to sort out that basket case.

Telecom Eireann had a state-of-the-art PSTN network in the 1980's and very early 1990's, that was the envy of many western nations. The problem with any part of the technology industry is that letting your guard down, or holding off on hardware for any longer than a year can drop you from the 99th percentile to the tenth percentile in terms of quality of network.

State companies have always been an excuse to employ people. The jobs for life bull**** still goes on, and unions still have the whole thing sown up, but that doesn't mean the company is automatically ****. Look at the ESB - too many employees, but easily one of the best, if not *the* best grid in the world. ESBi maintains the grid of many other countries.

The sale of eircom wasn't totally a joke, it was just done badly. The infrastructure should never have been sold. The only good thing about having state companies having too many employees is that they're always looking for something to give the guys to do. If Bridey MacBiddy from the arseend of Mayo has a problem getting DSL, then that's a great excuse to get Jim and Joe in Dublin to hop in a van and drive down there to spend a whole day sorting out her line, to give them something to do.

SkepticOne

seamus wrote:

The sale of eircom wasn't totally a joke, it was just done badly. The infrastructure should never have been sold. The only good thing about having state companies having too many employees is that they're always looking for something to give the guys to do. If Bridey MacBiddy from the arseend of Mayo has a problem getting DSL, then that's a great excuse to get Jim and Joe in Dublin to hop in a van and drive down there to spend a whole day sorting out her line, to give them something to do.

But if the network wasn't sold, it would have to be operated by a company. This company would either be private or state owned. If it was state owned, it would suffer from the ineficiencies you outline above and if it was private it would proceed to gouge maximum revenue from its position as operator.

As a state run company, TE didn't have a good reputation for inovation. There was a brief period in the 80s when there was indeed state-of-the-art digital exchanges, but this was due to the lateness of upgrading.

seamus

SkepticOne wrote:

But if the network wasn't sold, it would have to be operated by a company. This company would either be private or state owned. If it was state owned, it would suffer from the ineficiencies you outline above and if it was private it would proceed to gouge maximum revenue from its position as operator.

It should have been set up as a wholesale only state-owned company, which resold the connectivity to retail companies. It should have been operated by NUI or HEAnet, or a similar kind of idea, dedicated mostly to technology research and network development instead of profit.
Of course, "If ifs and buts were candy and nuts.....".

As a state run company, TE didn't have a good reputation for inovation. There was a brief period in the 80s when there was indeed state-of-the-art digital exchanges, but this was due to the lateness of upgrading.

In fairness, it was only then that we became "less poor", and de tellyfone was no longer a luxury.