Eircom 'technically in default'

Capt'n Midnight

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0320/breaking42.html

Credit default swaps are a form of insurance that bondholders can take out to guard against non-payment of their debts.

Hang on , you mean all our bondholders could have taken out insurance ??

ColeTrain

Will someone please think of Jim

Amirani

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0320/breaking42.html

Credit default swaps are a form of insurance that bondholders can take out to guard against non-payment of their debts.

Hang on , you mean all our bondholders could have taken out insurance ??

There was. Problem with these CDS is how interconnected financial institutions become. AIG insured bad loans and without Govt. assistance, the whole of Wall Street and more would've collapsed.

humbert

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0320/breaking42.html

Hang on , you mean all our bondholders could have taken out insurance ??

That's why the folks at the top of the food-chain are so sympathetic towards said bondholders and so eager that the folks at the bottom pay-up.

Celly Smunt

looks like that ungrateful little bitch will have to go to Albuquerque too see Brett

JONJO THE MISER

ColeTrain wrote: »

Will someone please think of Jim

Im sure Jim is being headhunted as we speak.
Liberty insurance maybe, he would fit right in there.

humbert

On the plus side, every step Eircom takes toward its demise is a step forward for Ireland's communication infrastructure. Also, it's nice to see bad things happen to utter cunts.

ColeTrain

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

Im sure Jim is being headhunted as we speak.
Liberty insurance maybe, he would fit right in there.

I could imagine him over at 123.ie
He seems the loyal type. Will probably stay with the sinking ship that is Eircom.

DB10

waaaaaaat is the story here. eircom are ****ed? prcies down? good news.

Pdfile

ColeTrain wrote: »

I could imagine him over at 123.ie
He seems the loyal type. Will probably stay with the sinking ship that is Eircom.

nah, knowing his sort he'll go with harvey norman...


their ***** and him are cut from the same cloth

My name is URL

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0329/eircom-applies-for-examinership.html

Eircom will ask for the protection of the High Court later this afternoon.

Mr Justice Peter Kelly was told the company and two related companies - Meteor and ITI - wanted to bring an urgent application before the court to petition for examinership.

Examinership is a process that protects company assets from creditors for up to 100 days while a survival plan is worked on to keep the business afloat.

The judge said he would read the papers over lunch and asked lawyers for Eircom to come back at 2pm.

The examinership is the largest in Irish corporate history.

Could this be the end of Eircom if it doesn't emerge successfully from this? 40% of the company's debt could be wiped out if it is successful. I wish I could go into examinership :pac:

chin_grin

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=77695696

prinz

Trust Peter Kelly. Seems to be a good ol' skin.

Nothingbetter2d

fix eircom

step 1. fire all the board of directors and dont payout bonus's or pensions

step 2. reduce the ridiculous high charges they have on line rental and broadband (this might entice more customers)

step 3. upgrade the network asap abandon copper based dsl in favour of fibre.

benway

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

fix eircom

step 1. fire all the board of directors and dont payout bonus's or pensions

step 2. reduce the ridiculous high charges they have on line rental and broadband (this might entice more customers)

step 3. upgrade the network asap abandon copper based dsl in favour of fibre.

Step 4. ???
Step 5. Profit

Nice to see that privatisation sorted out all of Eircom's problems. What a debacle.

Paparazzo

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Hang on , you mean all our bondholders could have taken out insurance ??

If they did we'd probably be paying off the insurance companies instead

D-Generate

They have a nice big corpo box in the Aviva. I will take that off their hands no problem.

seamus

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

step 3. upgrade the network asap abandon copper based dsl in favour of fibre.

The network is their problem. They're inextricably tied to a creaking and aging network and increased competition in the marketplace means that their customer base is crumbling while the network remains the same size.

The cost of the network is increasing while their income is dropping.

It turns out that not only was privatising the network a bad thing for the Irish state, it was also a bad thing for eircom in the end. If they'd been split 12 years ago, this problem wouldn't exist.

What they need to focus on now is gaining access to new customers via other people's networks without the associated network costs and opening their own network to their competitors.

It could even be the case that they could (for example) sell local infrastructure to another company who can invest in it and rent access back to eircom.
Outside of the main cities there are local town and city companies who would chomp at the bit to take possession of eircom's local infrastructure in order to improve their own.

44leto

Phew I am glad I got rid of those shares at the loss I settled for then. Mary O Rourke !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....

Eircom should be a lesson to us on the dangers of privatising a national strategic utility company. But we can expect another round of privatisations soon.

Capt'n Midnight

seamus wrote: »

It could even be the case that they could (for example) sell local infrastructure to another company who can invest in it and rent access back to eircom.
Outside of the main cities there are local town and city companies who would chomp at the bit to take possession of eircom's local infrastructure in order to improve their own.

No No No

Infrastructure (copper and exchanges) should be held by the state or neutral party , sorta like ESB networks, or the railway in the UK

all interested parties could put gear in the exchanges, last mile would be open to everyone



Before privatisation a lot of money was invested in eircom , we had direct dialing long before the UK, if it hadn't been for the popularity of ADSL they wouldn't have to invest in hardware for ages, and in actual fact they came damn close with infrastructure investment being roughly half the amount they were writing off in depreciation.

Eircoms problems stem from their monopoly on the last mile , UPC were held up for years on digital TV rollouts (most o the money goes to the rights holders) when they had the killer app of real broadband at at time when ADSL was the same price as downloading the same amount on per minute ISDN

Because of this monopoly they were able to charge double the EU average for line rental, the wholesale rate for BB was so close to the retail price and the change over fee was so high that it took 18 months before that cost was covered when another provider took an eircom customer

We are talking about a company that lost subscribers during a housing boom. Mobile phones were cheaper, a lot of people just didn't bother with a land line unless they needed broadband. Mobile data means that a lot of casual users don't need a physical line either. They priced themselves out of the market.

The company was asset stripped many times, and whatever possible was outsourced so the only asset it has is a monopoly on copper and the physical location of exchanges (and lots of them were downsized)

Does anyone know what % of eircom lines are in use for phones , excluding pensioners where state pays for the line rental, instead of being required for broadband or alarm lines ? ie. What percentage of the remaining customers are there by choice instead of absolute necessity or a freebie.


/RANT

benway

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The company was asset stripped many times, and whatever possible was outsourced so the only asset it has is a monopoly on copper and the physical location of exchanges (and lots of them were downsized)

Nice rant, chief. Doff o'cap.

Another triumph for privatisation - can't see the 30 days grace being enough to keep the vultures from the door, somehow, can probably expect a fire sale and/or a robber baron type takeover in the not too distant.

CrazyRabbit

Eircom are a shower of rip-off bastards.

But, when they are gone, there will be no Irish owned phone/broadband providers left in the country (I think), and that is a shame.

kirving

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Eircom are a shower of rip-off bastards.

But, when they are gone, there will be no Irish owned phone/broadband providers left in the country (I think), and that is a shame.

Isn't the price which they charge the customer(€€€) for line rental set by the regulator? (along with the price(~50c) they charge another operator to rent the same line)

vard

I'm curious, what does this mean for Meteor? As they're owned by Eircom...

benway

vard wrote: »

I'm curious, what does this mean for Meteor? As they're owned by Eircom...

In examinership as well, afaik. Wouldn't be surprised to see it being sold off.

vard

This stuff trickles down and could affect many other sectors. Meteor and Eircom support many other industries. One of which being the publishing and advertising industry... some of the biggest contracts, year on year, are coming from Eircom and Meteor. Then many B2B and direct marketing companies solely rely on marketing Eircom products also.

I dislike Eircoms service as much as the next guy, but it does rile me up when I see people saying "good riddance" etc. This isn't good news for anybody - Most definitely not for those who'll lose their jobs.

oppenheimer1

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

No No No

Infrastructure (copper and exchanges) should be held by the state or neutral party , sorta like ESB networks, or the railway in the UK

all interested parties could put gear in the exchanges, last mile would be open to everyone



Before privatisation a lot of money was invested in eircom , we had direct dialing long before the UK, if it hadn't been for the popularity of ADSL they wouldn't have to invest in hardware for ages, and in actual fact they came damn close with infrastructure investment being roughly half the amount they were writing off in depreciation.

Eircoms problems stem from their monopoly on the last mile , UPC were held up for years on digital TV rollouts (most o the money goes to the rights holders) when they had the killer app of real broadband at at time when ADSL was the same price as downloading the same amount on per minute ISDN

Because of this monopoly they were able to charge double the EU average for line rental, the wholesale rate for BB was so close to the retail price and the change over fee was so high that it took 18 months before that cost was covered when another provider took an eircom customer

We are talking about a company that lost subscribers during a housing boom. Mobile phones were cheaper, a lot of people just didn't bother with a land line unless they needed broadband. Mobile data means that a lot of casual users don't need a physical line either. They priced themselves out of the market.

The company was asset stripped many times, and whatever possible was outsourced so the only asset it has is a monopoly on copper and the physical location of exchanges (and lots of them were downsized)

Does anyone know what % of eircom lines are in use for phones , excluding pensioners where state pays for the line rental, instead of being required for broadband or alarm lines ? ie. What percentage of the remaining customers are there by choice instead of absolute necessity or a freebie.


/RANT

I disagree.

When Eircom was sold it was in the black, had an overfunded pension,had little debt and was generally a well run semi-state. It was also sold at the time of a communications and tech bubble and hence was grossly overvalued. When the bubble burst, not long after the sale the share price dropped 40%. The company was starting to fail and the only people that saw any benefit were the directors, who rewarded themselves handsomely. Ray McSharry and Dick Spring were among them.

At this stage Eircom was ripe for sale. Enter the George Soros backed Valentia telecoms vehicle. The consortium bought eircom by financing the sale mostly by borrowing against Eircom, they only put up €900m of their own money. In other words Eircom essentially mortgaged itself to pay off its shareholders. ESOT, the eircom employees positively facilitated this. Valentia began to asset strip and seeing they had a monopoly, jacked up line rental. They made 100% return on their investment within a year. Investment in new infrastructure stalled. Most importantly they didn't care about Eircom or Ireland and had no desire to actually run a telecoms company. They later sold on, wash rinse repeat, the same happened again with a new buyer, loading more debt onto the company. Another sale to Singapore telecoms the weight of debt has become to large of a burden and default is the only way out.

So Eircoms problems boil down to it being stripped by vultures aided and abetted by the employees share trust. No one was looking at the bigger picture, which was a shame, because when it was sold we had a damn fine telecoms network. Dare I say it we would still have the best telecom network if it had remained in state hands or even it was run by people who wanted to run a telecoms company. Ireland has been the greatest loser in this, thats the greatest tragedy.

gk5000

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I disagree.

When Eircom was sold it was in the black, had an overfunded pension,had little debt and was generally a well run semi-state. It was also sold at the time of a communications and tech bubble and hence was grossly overvalued. When the bubble burst, not long after the sale the share price dropped 40%. The company was starting to fail and the only people that saw any benefit were the directors, who rewarded themselves handsomely. Ray McSharry and Dick Spring were among them.

At this stage Eircom was ripe for sale. Enter the George Soros backed Valentia telecoms vehicle. The consortium bought eircom by financing the sale mostly by borrowing against Eircom, they only put up €900m of their own money. In other words Eircom essentially mortgaged itself to pay off its shareholders. ESOT, the eircom employees positively facilitated this. Valentia began to asset strip and seeing they had a monopoly, jacked up line rental. They made 100% return on their investment within a year. Investment in new infrastructure stalled. Most importantly they didn't care about Eircom or Ireland and had no desire to actually run a telecoms company. They later sold on, wash rinse repeat, the same happened again with a new buyer, loading more debt onto the company. Another sale to Singapore telecoms the weight of debt has become to large of a burden and default is the only way out.

So Eircoms problems boil down to it being stripped by vultures aided and abetted by the employees share trust. No one was looking at the bigger picture, which was a shame, because when it was sold we had a damn fine telecoms network. Dare I say it we would still have the best telecom network if it had remained in state hands or even it was run by people who wanted to run a telecoms company. Ireland has been the greatest loser in this, thats the greatest tragedy.

Maybe it was the other way about - rip off employess facilitated by vulture capitalists.

And maybe we (the state) were well rid of it. With mobile, copper and fibre may be obselete. Nobody needs a landline for voice any more. And while mobile broadband is not perfect, it's catching up.

My only hope is that the lazy employees (top, middle & bottom) get what they deserve...and the bondholders... and nobody gets bailed out.

seamus

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

No No No

Infrastructure (copper and exchanges) should be held by the state or neutral party , sorta like ESB networks, or the railway in the UK

all interested parties could put gear in the exchanges, last mile would be open to everyone

Actually I don't disagree, but I don't believe that the state has the money to either purchase or maintain eircom's infrastructure at this stage.

I'm also uncertain as to the ultimate greatness of their infrastructure at this stage anyway. Unlike electricity for example, the last mile is on the verge of being made redundant for your normal user. Within 15 years the mobile infrastructure will be able to carry 100Mb+ traffic without any wires in the ground. Wires will always trump wireless ultimately, but for your average Joe's requirements they won't need copper or fibre to their door anymore.

The reason their network is **** is entirely because the state didn't hold onto it, I agree completely. Eircom sat on their infrastructure and refused to invest in proper internet technologies because they wanted to suck their customers dry on per-minute dial-up rates and ISDN. They continually claimed that there was no demand for broadband and that there was no "killer app" for the internet :rolleyes:

It was really around 2005 when UPC/NTL saw their subscriber figures shoot up and new homes weren't bothering with landlines, choosing mobiles instead, that eircom realised they couldn't sit on their network and needed to pump money into digital services. But at that stage it was already too late. The owners had more interest in sweating the assets and all their major competitors had a five-year jump on them.

At this stage if the state was to take the network it would be a big money pit, and while the end consumer would benefit massively, how many hundreds of millions would it cost to bring it up to EU-average standard?

Capt'n Midnight

seamus wrote: »

At this stage if the state was to take the network it would be a big money pit, and while the end consumer would benefit massively, how many hundreds of millions would it cost to bring it up to EU-average standard?

The cost of replacing the network with fibre to the cabinet would have been a fraction of what the NRA have spent on roads, we could have a lot more telecommuters and a lot less traffic.

With a little foresight we could have insisted on common ducts to all new builds during the boom (very low cost) passive heating (a small fraction of the cost of what houses were selling for) , fibred up cabinet for all new estates. I guess this would have paid for itself by now on the savings in imported fuel.

midband technologies won't have the bandwidth unless you start setting up localised microcells or more point to point links. Fine for the casual user though. But the heavy lifting has to be done by fibre , and the question is how to pay for it ?

The model in Africa is mobile broadband / fixed wireless or fibre, copper isn't relevant anymore, it's too valuable to throw down a hole.


Perhaps the state could asset strip eircom one more time, replace copper with wireless / fiber. It's a project that would provide employment
start by putting cabinets in estates so one fibre replaces many parallel runs of copper

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/22/bt_copper_cable_theft/

Ten pairs of copper cabling weighs around 132kg per mile. Which by the miracle of multiplication can be seen to be about 10 million tonnes of copper. Which, at current LME prices of just over £5,000 a tonne, is £50bn.

BT's current market capitalisation is just north of £20bn. So, as an operating telecoms company they're worth £30bn less than the mountain of copper they're sitting upon:

...
Secondly, it's a shocking indictment of Britain's criminal classes. Really, why is anyone bothering to go and nick a few miles of the stuff when you could buy the company and take it all? Asset-strip BT and come out with more money after selling the copper than the company cost you in the first place.

That's the problem we've got with the young people of today: no ambition. ®

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/8785687/BT-denies-it-is-sitting-on-a-copper-mine-worth-50bn.html



Perhaps get ESB networks involved , they too have an interest in copper. Already have a box in houses and legal rights to enter property. (I'm not talking about internet over powerlines as that is a disaster. all the space unused after we go digital TV can be reused for internet etc, but powerline noise could kill it )

conor.hogan.2

vard wrote: »

I'm curious, what does this mean for Meteor? As they're owned by Eircom...

Speculation, but it will likely be sold off as it is a profitable company.

e-mobile on the other hand will either be sold with Meteor in a deal or will be disbanded. I think it will be disbanded, no need for it.

blaze1

Eircom's prices have to be agreed with comreg and because they have/had the majority of the market they have to keep there prices above the competion companies a chance to break into the market.

This is same when there is deregulation in any market, telecoms/gas/elec etc.

IMO other companies should be made to contribute more to support networks and using the infrastructure that is in place to support there own usage.

Capt'n Midnight

blaze1 wrote: »

IMO other companies should be made to contribute more to support networks and using the infrastructure that is in place to support there own usage.

If eircom were actually putting money into infrastructure instead of asset stripping you might have a point.

If the line rental / wholesale rate wasn't extortionately priced you might have a point.

everything that could be outsourced has been outsourced , it's not like they are using their own technicians to install / fix stuff !


http://www.eircomwholesale.ie/Reference-Offers/Documents/ARO-Price-List-V-5-2/ - price list, LOTS of extras if you want to use their exchanges, and you want them to charge more ?
Notice how many of the prices are dropping, finally. (but having to set prices to market rates won't help their profitability)


Not to say that the other providers are much better, any one got prices on how much it cost per line for the first round of local loop unbundling ??

Capt'n Midnight

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0330/decision-due-over-eircom-interim-examiner.html

Mr Justice Kelly said the history of the company since its flotation in 1999 made sad reading for the State and its citizens.

He said it was a game of corporate pass the parcel where the players won and the parcel lost.

Socialist_Pig

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Isn't the price which they charge the customer(€€€) for line rental set by the regulator? (along with the price(~50c) they charge another operator to rent the same line)

yes it is.

also have to laugh at people moaning about sh1te speeds when they are miles from the exchange.Ring upc and ask if they will run fibre to your tiny village and they will say no cause they wont make money off it.Eircom arent a charity yet people carry on as if its a god given right to have broadband.A friend of mine lives in the middle of no where and the only speeds he can manage are half a meg!!that would break my heart:D

Borderfox

F**k Eircom kept me on outrageously expensive dial up for far too long, what happened to their 60,000 customers return to Eircom each year (must have 120,000 leaving)

squod

Absolute cnuts. Glad they're fuhked. Karma coming back to them.

humbert

Socialist_Pig wrote: »

yes it is.

Are you sure? I thought they had to offer line rental to everyone who requested it and if the cost of installation was less than some very large number they could only charge a standard fee but that exact fee was up to eircom?

The cost of getting a phone line has risen astronomically in the last few years as a result of them losing customers and using their monopoly on the lines to bleed new customers dry.

plasmaguy

I know many people won't sympathise with this, but there are thousands of people working for Eircom, and anyone who'd like to see them put on the dole, really should be ashamed of themselves.

I hope Eircom can sort this out and save all or most of these jobs. Very difficult to find any kind of job these days.

Socialist_Pig

humbert wrote: »

Are you sure? I thought they had to offer line rental to everyone who requested it and if the cost of installation was less than some very large number they could only charge a standard fee but that exact fee was up to eircom?

The cost of getting a phone line has risen astronomically in the last few years as a result of them losing customers and using their monopoly on the lines to bleed new customers dry.

not sure exactly which part of the charges are regulated by comreg.It was in a reply by the eircom rep on the eircom forum but it was to do with BB package pricing.Its to stop eircom underselling other providers like vodafone,perlico etc.

will try and find it and post a link to it

plasmaguy

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I disagree.

When Eircom was sold it was in the black, had an overfunded pension,had little debt and was generally a well run semi-state. It was also sold at the time of a communications and tech bubble and hence was grossly overvalued. When the bubble burst, not long after the sale the share price dropped 40%. The company was starting to fail and the only people that saw any benefit were the directors, who rewarded themselves handsomely. Ray McSharry and Dick Spring were among them.

At this stage Eircom was ripe for sale. Enter the George Soros backed Valentia telecoms vehicle. The consortium bought eircom by financing the sale mostly by borrowing against Eircom, they only put up €900m of their own money. In other words Eircom essentially mortgaged itself to pay off its shareholders. ESOT, the eircom employees positively facilitated this. Valentia began to asset strip and seeing they had a monopoly, jacked up line rental. They made 100% return on their investment within a year. Investment in new infrastructure stalled. Most importantly they didn't care about Eircom or Ireland and had no desire to actually run a telecoms company. They later sold on, wash rinse repeat, the same happened again with a new buyer, loading more debt onto the company. Another sale to Singapore telecoms the weight of debt has become to large of a burden and default is the only way out.

So Eircoms problems boil down to it being stripped by vultures aided and abetted by the employees share trust. No one was looking at the bigger picture, which was a shame, because when it was sold we had a damn fine telecoms network. Dare I say it we would still have the best telecom network if it had remained in state hands or even it was run by people who wanted to run a telecoms company. Ireland has been the greatest loser in this, thats the greatest tragedy.

Oversimplistic to be fair.

When it was sold, it was a virtual monopoly, with very few competitors, although Esat/BT were on the rise, but still miniscule.

Once Broadband packages became popular, competition became fierce and Eircom was just another provider.

It carried over massive overheads from its semi state days, as well as entrenched unionisation and so on.

Turning it into an efficient profitable private company was always going to be a massive ask.

humbert

Socialist_Pig wrote: »

not sure exactly which part of the charges are regulated by comreg.It was in a reply by the eircom rep on the eircom forum but it was to do with BB package pricing.Its to stop eircom underselling other providers like vodafone,perlico etc.

will try and find it and post a link to it

Thanks, though to be honest and as a result of my own dealings with telecommunications representatives you can usually take what they say with a grain of salt. Sometimes it's the result of ignorance but often it's simply easier for them to blatantly lie and then plead ignorance if they get called on it.

Banjaxed82

plasmaguy wrote: »

I know many people won't sympathise with this, but there are thousands of people working for Eircom, and anyone who'd like to see them put on the dole, really should be ashamed of themselves.

Eircom has an ancient work force as well, so those chaps won't be getting another job again in a hurry.

Capt'n Midnight

plasmaguy wrote: »

I know many people won't sympathise with this, but there are thousands of people working for Eircom, and anyone who'd like to see them put on the dole, really should be ashamed of themselves.

I hope Eircom can sort this out and save all or most of these jobs. Very difficult to find any kind of job these days.

5,000 employees, they plan to shed 1,000 by 2017

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/phone-lines-still-work-despite-our-biggest-corporate-insolvency-3056219.html

The numbers involved are staggering. Eircom is in default on €3.75bn of debt -- that's around €1,000 each for its 3.5 million customers.
Managers and top lenders are going to court because they want as much as €1.7bn of the debt simply written off.
...
company set for its sixth set of owners in little more than a decade.
It's a mind-boggling destruction of wealth, but it is also capitalism in action.

Eircom borrowed the money in the go-go years of the boom.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0330/1224314097041.html plan is to loose 1,000 out of the 5,000 by 2017

which isn't all that bad when you consider how the number of suscribers has fallen in the past

Eoin

squod wrote: »

Absolute cnuts. Glad they're fuhked. Karma coming back to them.

Who's "them"? The thousands of staff who have nothing to do with setting policy or prices? How ignorant.

There are lots of people there who joined after all the old P&T privileges were taken off the table and after the ESOP scheme closed.

It was a frustrating place to work, but there are lots of good people there who don't deserve those types of keyboard-warrior comments.

UglyBolloxFace

Obviously I feel bad for the staff who will possibly be out of jobs, but to Eircom - they can go **** themselves.

musohead

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Obviously I feel bad for the staff who will possibly be out of jobs, but to Eircom - they can go **** themselves.

Just who is 'eircom'?
Hardly the successive sets of greedy venture capitalists who creamed off its assets and loaded it with debt? The guilty parties have mostly left the building, and that includes our own government who gave up control and turned a blind eye. Not to say ESOT comes out much better but they never had any real control.

So the 'eircom' that's the target of ignorant comments like those above is the staff and its customers.

It's a shame to see a debt-free company raped like that. And a shame Ireland lost out on a decent communications infrastructure as the money went into the pockets of the already rich. Imagine what a €4bn network would look like!

plasmaguy

plasmaguy wrote: »

I know many people won't sympathise with this, but there are thousands of people working for Eircom, and anyone who'd like to see them put on the dole, really should be ashamed of themselves.

I hope Eircom can sort this out and save all or most of these jobs. Very difficult to find any kind of job these days.

As Eircom (or whatever it becomes) has almost all of the "last mile" infrastructure, i don't expect too many (engineers) will lose their jobs.

Their network is huge and like all the other national telecom providers needs constant maintenance, especially when you have skangers stealing lengths of cable and cutting off whole suburbs at a time.

All the other telco's in Ireland are dependent on Eircom to carry their services.

musohead

musohead wrote: »

Just who is 'eircom'?
Hardly the successive sets of greedy venture capitalists who creamed off its assets and loaded it with debt? The guilty parties have mostly left the building, and that includes our own government who gave up control and turned a blind eye. Not to say ESOT comes out much better but they never had any real control.

So the 'eircom' that's the target of ignorant comments like those above is the staff and its customers.

It's a shame to see a debt-free company raped like that. And a shame Ireland lost out on a decent communications infrastructure as the money went into the pockets of the already rich. Imagine what a €4bn network would look like!

Asset stripping, Eircom today - Ireland tomorrow!

Eoin

I wonder what will happen with the USO. Comreg will have to find a new punching bag too.

squod

Eoin wrote: »

Who's "them"? The thousands of staff who have nothing to do with setting policy or prices? How ignorant.

There are lots of people there who joined after all the old P&T privileges were taken off the table and after the ESOP scheme closed.

It was a frustrating place to work, but there are lots of good people there who don't deserve those types of keyboard-warrior comments.

I'm no keyboard warrior. Slagging me off won't get them sympathy from me. I was done over by ''them'', not their fuhken policies. As I said, it's a karma thing.

How ignorant of me for calling it like it is? They're fuhked, I'm glad. The end.