SIRO - ESB/Vodafone Fibre To The Home

ItHurtsWhenIP

bk wrote: »

That is like asking why do Eircom and UPC each of their own separate networks operating in the same areas.
...

Ah, but these are two sorta different infrastructures. They certainly started life as such. One was to deliver telephony services, the other was to deliver TV services. Granted they have since migrated towards broadband provision, but this was not the starting point. The FTTH starting point is pure high-speed broadband provision. I suppose what annoys me is that they will waste valuable time laying fibre into places where there is already fibre and not get out to me for several months because of this duplicated effort.

bk wrote: »

I expect what will happen is that both Eircom and SIRO will run fiber down every street, passing homes, but won't actually connect the fiber right into the home until you actually order it. That is the norm with most FTTH networks around the world.

If they were duplicating, then I would agree this makes sense.

bk wrote: »

... Then if you were to order a FTTH product from Eircom Wholesale, then they come back out and connect the fiber from the street to your house.

If a year later, you then decide to switch to Vodafone/SIRO, then they come out and run a new fiber to connect from your house to the SIRO fiber on the street.

Ah, but you or I will not be ordering off Eircom Wholesale or Siro as we are mere retail customers.

bk wrote: »

One interesting and logical possibility here is that Eircom Wholesale and SIRO could come to an agreement to share the last 20 meter of fiber connecting your home to their network. So for instance, in the above scenario, when you order Vodafone/SIRO broadband, rather then running the second fiber, they instead unplug the original Eircom drop from the Eircom street fiber and connect it to the SIRO street fiber (or vice versa). Obviously there would have to be an agreement on this and it is probably early days for this yet.

Again, I don't know if we get a say in this matter. I would certainly hope such a sensible arrangement is put in place.

bk wrote: »

As for your question about Monster Broadband. While possible for retail ISP's to use both networks, I doubt it will work out that way. I expect they will contract with either Eircom Wholesale or SIRO. Too much administrative trouble otherwise. The intersting scenario is where Vodafone continues to retail Eircom VDSL, but then switches those customers over to SIRO as it becomes available. That would probably piss Eircom off.

I'd be a little worried about the small ISPs, as I don't think they would have the backhaul to handle if all of their customers were to switch to FTTH. Or will the service delivered over either FTTH infrastructure route directly back to INEX and not go through the ISPs own network?

bk

MMFITWGDV wrote: »

Ah, but these are two sorta different infrastructures. They certainly started life as such. One was to deliver telephony services, the other was to deliver TV services. Granted they have since migrated towards broadband provision, but this was not the starting point. The FTTH starting point is pure high-speed broadband provision. I suppose what annoys me is that they will waste valuable time laying fibre into places where there is already fibre and not get out to me for several months because of this duplicated effort.

While they both started out as two different type of networks, both companies have spent an absolute fortune in upgrading their networks to support broadband.

UPC has ripped up pretty much every meter of coax cable and replaced it with a much higher grade cable to support broadband.

Eircom has deployed a massive amount of fiber to support broadband.

Pretty much both companies have replaced their old networks with new networks to support broadband, so the point stands. Clearly from the Eircom/UPC example, it is possible for two companies to have duplicate infrastructure servicing the same areas and still be profitable.

Either way there is absolutely nothing you or I can do to stop any company from building their own duplicate network.

As long as they aren't receiving government subsidy to do it, then there is nothing legally we can do to stop them and rightfully so. If any company wants to risk their money in building their own network, then they have every right to do so.

Personally I think it is affordable to have two networks in all urban areas and it certainly is better for the consumer.

We certainly shouldn't be putting any roadblocks in their way. Competition is good. In fact I'm 100% certain that the reason Eircom speed up and expanded their VDSL rollout was the threat from SIRO and also why they have suddenly jumped on rolling out FTTH so fast now.

I'm certain if it wasn't for the competitive presence of SIRO, Eircom wouldn't bother to roll out FTTH for years to come!

I would like to encourage them to share where it makes sense. But probably not more then the last 20 meters into every ones house. Beyond that I'm glad to see two competitive networks in place.

[/QUOTE]I'd be a little worried about the small ISPs, as I don't think they would have the backhaul to handle if all of their customers were to switch to FTTH. Or will the service delivered over either FTTH infrastructure route directly back to INEX and not go through the ISPs own network?[/QUOTE]

It depends, they can buy different products and different levels of access from Eircom wholesale. Really small ISP's can probably take it off Eircom just at Eircoms main point of presence in Dublin. However big players like BT, who have their own fiber in lots of the main exchanges (for LLU) and have their own national backhaul network, would take it off Eircom at the exchange level and transport it to INEX, etc. on their own national network as it would be cheaper.

dxhound2005

bk wrote: »

That is like asking why do Eircom and UPC each of their own separate networks operating in the same areas.

Because you make more profit servicing even 50% of the people if you own the network, versus just being a re-seller of someone elses network.

The money is in owning the network.

If Eircom and UPC both can operate a profitable business only wining 50% of customers in UPC areas, there is no reason Eircom and SIRO can't do the same in non-UPC urban areas.

Of course they would prefer to have a monopoly, but they don't really get a choice in that.

I expect what will happen is that both Eircom and SIRO will run fiber down every street, passing homes, but won't actually connect the fiber right into the home until you actually order it. That is the norm with most FTTH networks around the world.

So for instance you might have both an Eircom Wholesale and a SIRO fiber running down your street outside your home, but not connected to your home. Then if you were to order a FTTH product from Eircom Wholesale, then they come back out and connect the fiber from the street to your house.

If a year later, you then decide to switch to Vodafone/SIRO, then they come out and run a new fiber to connect from your house to the SIRO fiber on the street.

One interesting and logical possibility here is that Eircom Wholesale and SIRO could come to an agreement to share the last 20 meter of fiber connecting your home to their network. So for instance, in the above scenario, when you order Vodafone/SIRO broadband, rather then running the second fiber, they instead unplug the original Eircom drop from the Eircom street fiber and connect it to the SIRO street fiber (or vice versa). Obviously there would have to be an agreement on this and it is probably early days for this yet.

As for your question about Monster Broadband. While possible for retail ISP's to use both networks, I doubt it will work out that way. I expect they will contract with either Eircom Wholesale or SIRO. Too much administrative trouble otherwise. The intersting scenario is where Vodafone continues to retail Eircom VDSL, but then switches those customers over to SIRO as it becomes available. That would probably piss Eircom off.

I registered my interest with SIRO on this link, which says that Dundalk will be the first town to get the service.

http://siro.ie/towns/dundalk-fibre-to-the-building/

My estate will have a ESB outage next Sunday to facilitate the rollout of the fibre network. I can't remember the exact wording on the next page, where email address etc have to be provided. But I read it as my existing broadband provider (Eircom) would be able to offer me the new FTTH using the SIRO fibre. I fully expected that it would say Vodafone would be the service provider.

Maybe someone else could register interest and get the exact wording.

I understood that Eircom would only bring FTTH to customers who requested it. Rather than running fibre everywhere from the cabinets to the areas which are going to get the service.

murphaph

Personally I think there should be legislation to prevent duplicate ftth networks being built, so long as all networks are open to resellers.

We'd all scratch our heads if UPC or Eircom began laying parallel electricity cables in their ducts.

ED E

murphaph wrote: »

Personally I think there should be legislation to prevent duplicate ftth networks being built, so long as all networks are open to resellers.

We'd all scratch our heads if UPC or Eircom began laying parallel electricity cables in their ducts.

Totally disagree here. While it seems wasteful you cant have a physical layer monopoly.

Its no good having an AMAZING vodafone(for example) network with SUPER customer support and ALL of the international transit if the repairs have to be done by a monkey who'll take 4 weeks to resolve an issue. Doesn't matter who the operator is, said monkey goes out. With two networks that monkeys boss loses money until he's trained or replaced.


UPC have this area right by the way. If their techs get two "repeats" within a calendar month and they can't prove they did everything to resolve all issues they get a disciplinary meeting with management. Eircom could learn a lot from them (Accepting POTS is a weaker medium than Coax).

mass_debater

murphaph wrote: »

Personally I think there should be legislation to prevent duplicate ftth networks being built, so long as all networks are open to resellers.

We'd all scratch our heads if UPC or Eircom began laying parallel electricity cables in their ducts.

Having a choice if two completely independent networks is the ideal situation for the customer, real proper competition. Many providers reselling over a monopoly network isn't competition and is no good for the market.

bk

murphaph wrote: »

Personally I think there should be legislation to prevent duplicate ftth networks being built, so long as all networks are open to resellers.

The lads have already said it above. We have already had the dark days of Eircom have an infrastructure monopoly, we certainly don't want to be returning to that!

Almost everything good that has happened in the Irish Broadband market is a result of real network level competition.

- UPC rebuilding their network and offer superb, affordable, very high speed broadband, forced Eircom to quickly introduce VDSL or lose all their customers in UPC areas.
- The threat of SIRO forced Eircom to expand and speed up their rollout of VDSL outside of UPC areas and is now forcing them to quickly roll out FTTH.

Anyway, I don't think the government could stop them even if they wanted to legally. I believe such a ruling would go completely against EU competition laws!

Johnboy1951

bk wrote:

So for instance you might have both an Eircom Wholesale and a SIRO fiber running down your street outside your home, but not connected to your home. Then if you were to order a FTTH product from Eircom Wholesale, then they come back out and connect the fiber from the street to your house.

If a year later, you then decide to switch to Vodafone/SIRO, then they come out and run a new fiber to connect from your house to the SIRO fiber on the street.

One interesting and logical possibility here is that Eircom Wholesale and SIRO could come to an agreement to share the last 20 meter of fiber connecting your home to their network. So for instance, in the above scenario, when you order Vodafone/SIRO broadband, rather then running the second fiber, they instead unplug the original Eircom drop from the Eircom street fiber and connect it to the SIRO street fiber (or vice versa). Obviously there would have to be an agreement on this and it is probably early days for this yet.

If a customer of SIRO with FTTH wishes to have a second independent connection and they contract with Eircom for the second connection, what do you see happening?

I don't see then swapping the physical connection from one to the other.

murphaph

If it's properly regulated there's no reason why one physical network wouldn't be enough. If I have a power cut and I'm with Airtricity my fault will be reapaired as fast as any other customer with any other retail provider. You establish minimum terms of service for the network operator and go from there.

I see data as I see electricity, just as a commodity now. We wouldn't dream of parallel gas, water or electricity lines, don't see why the commodity of data should be treated differently.

Of course if business customers need dedicated lines then, just as with electricity, they should be able to order them.

digiman

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

If a customer of SIRO with FTTH wishes to have a second independent connection and they contract with Eircom for the second connection, what do you see happening?

I don't see then swapping the physical connection from one to the other.

I don't see it happening either, the simple fact that it would be a nightmare to manage from an operations point of view as it would be difficult to say who would own the fault. Also would require SIRO and Eircom having their drop points in the same place which I don't think would happen either. There may not be that much advantage to it anyway.

mass_debater

murphaph wrote: »

If it's properly regulated there's no reason why one physical network wouldn't be enough. If I have a power cut and I'm with Airtricity my fault will be reapaired as fast as any other customer with any other retail provider. You establish minimum terms of service for the network operator and go from there.

I see data as I see electricity, just as a commodity now. We wouldn't dream of parallel gas, water or electricity lines, don't see why the commodity of data should be treated differently.

Of course if business customers need dedicated lines then, just as with electricity, they should be able to order them.

Electricity and gas networks are both state owned, telecoms is completely different as there are private companies with their own networks

Nollog

dxhound2005 wrote: »

My estate will have a ESB outage next Sunday to facilitate the rollout of the fibre network. I can't remember the exact wording on the next page, where email address etc have to be provided. But I read it as my existing broadband provider (Eircom) would be able to offer me the new FTTH using the SIRO fibre. I fully expected that it would say Vodafone would be the service provider.

Maybe someone else could register interest and get the exact wording.

I understood that Eircom would only bring FTTH to customers who requested it. Rather than running fibre everywhere from the cabinets to the areas which are going to get the service.

SIRO've said from the offset they'll just be providing a network for companies to sell to customers.

They're going to be an alternative to eircom wholesale, who are a separate entity from eircom retail, the folks you deal with on the phone.

The service will be available from sky, eircom retail, upc, digiweb, magnet, vodafone, even Irish Water if they wanted to offer it.

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

If a customer of SIRO with FTTH wishes to have a second independent connection and they contract with Eircom for the second connection, what do you see happening?

I don't see then swapping the physical connection from one to the other.

They run a second connection into the home, a single fibre cable into a new eircom ONT where the line comes in, and then an eircom modem.

I don't see what bk wants being a possibility. No ISP out there wants you to use a piece of equipment they don't vet themselves.
Their customer service training has to be as simple as possible so it costs as little as possible.

enfant terrible

mass_debater wrote: »

Having a choice if two completely independent networks is the ideal situation for the customer, real proper competition. Many providers reselling over a monopoly network isn't competition and is no good for the market.

Is that why the broadband in the US is so expensive?

ED E

enfant terrible wrote: »

Is that why the broadband in the US is so expensive?

Yes.

The US is the worst for it. Its been abundantly clear for years that the ISPs in the US have refused to overlap their networks at all and so the only competition tends to be a 4Mb DSL connection vs a 50Mb cable connection. And thats where there are two options at all.

The Fed put a rake of money in to build out their networks for the public good, but most of it seems to have gone to shareholders.

We really want to be Estonia, not the US.

enfant terrible

ED E wrote: »

Yes.

The US is the worst for it. Its been abundantly clear for years that the ISPs in the US have refused to overlap their networks at all and so the only competition tends to be a 4Mb DSL connection vs a 50Mb cable connection. And thats where there are two options at all.

The Fed put a rake of money in to build out their networks for the public good, but most of it seems to have gone to shareholders.

We really want to be Estonia, not the US.

It's amazing the only superpower in the world has such poor broadband options.

murphaph

mass_debater wrote: »

Electricity and gas networks are both state owned, telecoms is completely different as there are private companies with their own networks

The telecoms networks were all state owned as well, even UPC's network started off as a semi-state. If the electricity network was sold off in the same manner as the Telephone and Cable TV networks were, would it then be acceptable to build parallel, competing electricity networks into peoples' homes?? No, it would still be a waste of effort.

I'm a big fan of the free market and competition by the way. I am for small government, but some things should remain in state hands or at least be regulated by the state. Maybe we're afraid of that as the state in Ireland's case has made a dog's dinner of regulating things so often before, so I can understand the fear.

Anyway, this is all moot as we will continue to have the setup we have. I am still very happy with the huge progress we are making, I just think if the regulation was slightly different, we'd avoid the overlap in physical infrastructure, which will of course slow down the roll out of FTTH overall, as crews will be working in areas where FTTH already exists, rather than looking to expand in other, less profitable areas where it doesn't.

TireeTerror

Do we have any idea how far from the centre of towns SIRO will be deploying? To be more clear, everything so far has been in built up areas and as soon as you get to the edge of the built up areas everyone has to rely on the pathetic ADSL from Eircom. Will SIRO be pushing out further into the sticks at all?

Nollog

murphaph wrote: »

The telecoms networks were all state owned as well, even UPC's network started off as a semi-state. If the electricity network was sold off in the same manner as the Telephone and Cable TV networks were, would it then be acceptable to build parallel, competing electricity networks into peoples' homes?? No, it would still be a waste of effort.

I'm a big fan of the free market and competition by the way. I am for small government, but some things should remain in state hands or at least be regulated by the state. Maybe we're afraid of that as the state in Ireland's case has made a dog's dinner of regulating things so often before, so I can understand the fear.

Anyway, this is all moot as we will continue to have the setup we have. I am still very happy with the huge progress we are making, I just think if the regulation was slightly different, we'd avoid the overlap in physical infrastructure, which will of course slow down the roll out of FTTH overall, as crews will be working in areas where FTTH already exists, rather than looking to expand in other, less profitable areas where it doesn't.

Yeah, the original private owners of eircom got a great deal.

murphaph

TireeTerror wrote: »

Do we have any idea how far from the centre of towns SIRO will be deploying? To be more clear, everything so far has been in built up areas and as soon as you get to the edge of the built up areas everyone has to rely on the pathetic ADSL from Eircom. Will SIRO be pushing out further into the sticks at all?

Who knows. A year ago I would have said "no chance, wait for the NBP", but Eircom removed 300k premises (mostly attached to tiny exchanges I would never have thought profitable) from the NBP, so what is unprofitable today may not be tomorrow.

In any case, if Siro or Eircom don't get to you with commercial FTTH, the NBP will likely get to you with FTTH as other options look like they will only be deployed in limited circumstances (the spec is too high for most wireless solutions to reliably satisfy and the wireless operators are too small to tender for the anticipated large size of the projects).

bk

ED E wrote: »

The US is the worst for it. Its been abundantly clear for years that the ISPs in the US have refused to overlap their networks at all and so the only competition tends to be a 4Mb DSL connection vs a 50Mb cable connection. And thats where there are two options at all.

Exactly and when a city suddenly gets real competition from Google Fiber coming to a town, suddenly Comcast/Verizon/ATT drop the price in half and suddenly start offering 1Gb/s products of their own!!

It is amazing looking at the price and services offered by Comcast/Verizon/ATT in cities with Google Fiber, compared to what they offer in the next city over where they have no competition!

In areas without Google Fiber most people pay well over €100 per month for 50Mb/s!!!

That is why we definitely don't want the same here in Ireland. Competition is good. Competition has driven almost every good thing that has happened in the Irish Broadband market.

We will probably end up with only one network in rural areas and that will be a necessary evil that will need to be carefully regulated to ensure abuse doesn't happen. But we definitely want at least two physical networks in all urban areas where it is financially viable to do so.

KOR101

murphaph wrote: »

Who knows. A year ago I would have said "no chance, wait for the NBP", but Eircom removed 300k premises (mostly attached to tiny exchanges I would never have thought profitable) from the NBP, so what is unprofitable today may not be tomorrow.

We still don't know if they ARE actually profitable. The government certainly has not simply taken it at face value. They may conclude that the announcement was just an attempt to take those premises off the table, and decide to leave them in the NBP.

SpaceTime

You can't think like these are public untilities like Telecom Éireann.

If you allow them to carve up the market they limit competition and also any cost efficiencies will be returned to them as higher profit margin. They've no philanthropic interest in pushing forward with broadband speed and they're not public bodies with a mandate to provide a public service.

One of the single biggest problems here after eircom was sold was the politicians still thinking about it as if it were a state service.

Eircom, UPC and Siro are there to make money. You have to design the market to ensure that the public get the best services at the lowest prices.

Pandering to telcos desires to cut capex is a road to nowhere.

It's happening in the United States because well, it's the best democracy that money can buy. Lobbying by telco interests over there is ensuring a lot of stuff that could be happening, isn't.

ED E

Tom Wheeler went from a senior position in Comcast to head of the FCC. Thats like Moat from eircom going to run Comreg. Wheeler has changed his tune of late, but personally I suspect that was after a spanking from Obama(he gave Obama the finger, verbally).

Machinehead

Excerpt from email response by Siro re supply of fibre broadband to those areas just outside urban areas.
" Phase 1 of the SIRO rollout is focused on homes and premises within the urban boundaries of the towns targeted."

rob808

Machinehead wrote: »

Excerpt from email response by Siro re supply of fibre broadband to those areas just outside urban areas.
" Phase 1 of the SIRO rollout is focused on homes and premises within the urban boundaries of the towns targeted."

Yea house outside of these towns would have wait till NBP start and hope that siro wins the area there in.

Nollog

ive pretty much given up on siro.

the lack of information has left me with a sour taste.

markad1

Rush was mixed in with Skerries, now it just says Skerries.
Please tell me Rush is still in the pot.

damienirel

/\/ollog wrote: »

ive pretty much given up on siro.

the lack of information has left me with a sour taste.

In fairness it seems to be a pretty unambitious roll-out. I don't know anybody that has it yet and there's only a handful of boardies who seem to have it.
Like old eircom most of the money seems to be going on marketing it rather than installing it - I would have thought word of mouth would be enough to market it - its a product nobody else is selling???

dbit

damienirel wrote: »

In fairness it seems to be a pretty unambitious roll-out. I don't know anybody that has it yet and there's only a handful of boardies who seem to have it.
Like old eircom most of the money seems to be going on marketing it rather than installing it - I would have thought word of mouth would be enough to market it - its a product nobody else is selling???

Well i think they see as with Eircom , Ara sure fu@k it there's no rush . Its not like anyone is challenging them right now nor into the near future . We all knew this would be the way it would go . Eircom as it is now i cannot see them blowing fiber from cabs anytime soon either.

Spoke to a KN guy the other day at a garage and he had some very interesting insights that more or less back my attitude.

Plenty of bullsh1t artist tweets from them thats about it .

Nollog

Nobody wants to go first is that it?