Eircom to roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 66 towns

dxhound2005

noc1980 wrote: »

Can anyone tell me when a town is 1gb enabled what the story will be with distance from the exchange and it's impact on speed? Will we need to be within a certain range to avail of these speeds?

I think when you have FTTH you will get the full speed no matter how far you are from the exchange. But Eircom have not given any detailed information as to what parts of the 66 towns/cities will be connected. Their original press release from last October says:


The planned footprint includes areas of all five major cities, major regional centres and every county town in Ireland. Detailed rollout plans for each community will be announced in due course.

Note the phrase "areas of".

http://pressroom.eircom.net/press_releases/article/eircom_to_Offer_Gigabit_Broadband_Speeds/

The very same wording is used in their newest press release detailing the first 16 towns to be connected.

http://pressroom.eircom.net/press_releases/article/eircom_selects_huawei_for_fibre_to_the_home/

ED E

GPON can do 10km+, range isn't an issue. Its a question of how far they're willing to pull/blow it.

swoofer

No, the idea of fibre is that distance becomes irrelevant, fibre is glass and the signal is light so theoretically it can go on forever! but as with everything other factors intervene. Its good for about 60 miles before it needs amplification but it changes everyday. In towns it will be governed by cost, ie the actual cable itself and the cost of running it to each house, eircom have a nice video that explains how the intend to do it. Each cabinet will have 24 main fibre cables and each cable can support 32 houses so say 768 houses per cabinet. I would say eircom will concentrate on boxes that are full already and close to groups of houses. The range at the moment is 1000m. Speed will be on what you want to pay. This is all new so no one really knows how its going to work. The way it appears to me eircom will have cables at cabinet all ready and then say its available, then you ring up and get a cost, I am 850m from cabinet so I think my installation may be more than someone 100m from cabinet but eircom may offset this by their charges ie a common intsallation fee and then pay more for the speed ie 150, 300, or 1gb. I think the big caveat may be number of take ups, say I am the only one who want it then eircom may say no you have to wait until a minimum number sign up. Its still a mystery but when it happens it will be awesome.

Gonzo

ED E wrote: »

GPON can do 10km+, range isn't an issue. Its a question of how far they're willing to pull/blow it.

Hopefully they will pull it all the way, they need to in order to start tackling homes outside of the town 'boundary'. If and when dunshaughlin gets started that 10km range would get the entire town and surrounding houses all the way to boundary with Ratoath, nearly half way north to Navan and South to the Dunboyne boundary. If that was applied to all towns/villages, that would cover nearly everybody except those on long rural one off housing areas. Sounds like the perfect solution for ribbon development throughout Meath, Kildare and Wicklow.

lucernarian

swoofer wrote: »

No...

No to what exactly? If it's about GPON able to do any arbitrary distance, not just 10km then that's simply wrong. Even glass introduces attenuation for a laser beam. There's little background noise as such except for thermal noise in the receiver for example but that doesn't mean a fibre cable can work at infinite lengths and anyway (10)GPON is a particular standard which would need more expensive splitters or taps or whatever they're called, and more expensive higher-quality glass fibres to allow for longer and longer distances. Also VDSL2 has been allowed for customers up to 2km away from the cabinet according to lots of reports on this forum.

Besides, ED E works in the industry.

dxhound2005

lucernarian wrote: »

No to what exactly? If it's about GPON able to do any arbitrary distance, not just 10km then that's simply wrong. Even glass introduces attenuation for a laser beam. There's little background noise as such except for thermal noise in the receiver for example but that doesn't mean a fibre cable can work at infinite lengths and anyway (10)GPON is a particular standard which would need more expensive splitters or taps or whatever they're called, and more expensive higher-quality glass fibres to allow for longer and longer distances. Also VDSL2 has been allowed for customers up to 2km away from the cabinet according to lots of reports on this forum.

Besides, ED E works in the industry.

I think Swoofer was replying to noc1980's post.

lucernarian

No to noc1980's post, fair enough!

digiman

Range will depend on how what type of optical transmitters and receivers they go with in the home and also back in the exchange or cabin. Fibre normally has a loss of 0.2-0.25dB/km, but GPON networks will have splitters which will introduce further significant losses depending on splitting ratio. 1:2, 1:4, 1:8, 1:16, 1:32, 1:64. Typical values below.

SPLITTER 1x2 1x4 1x8 1x16 1x32 1x64
LOSS (dB) 3.8 8 11.5 14.5 18 21

You also have splicing loses and connecters to contend with but these are usually quite low but they will add up. Around 20km would probably be the limit with standard equipment and some networks may choose to go with less to give a larger margin as the network will degrade slightly over time.

The main point here is that there is a huge different between the distance that you will get out of fibre in a GPON network and in a core backhaul network using DWDM between cities for example and this is down to one is a point to multipoint and the other is a point to point network.

Gonzo

lucernarian wrote: »

Also VDSL2 has been allowed for customers up to 2km away from the cabinet according to lots of reports on this forum.

While that may be true in some cases, it is only available up to 2km if property is fed into the cabinet and even where it happens after about 1300m the speeds aren't great and in some cases slower than the DSL equivalent after 1500m+ in many cases. e.g. some people here who were/still are on 10-15meg ADSL2+ only getting up to 7meg on efibre.

Anyone more than 1km away will be much better served with real fibre if and when it comes around. This real fibre is very badly needed for homes on the edge of town, ribbon developments, business's/schools both urban and rural etc.

loyatemu

Gonzo wrote: »

Anyone more than 1km away will be much better served with real fibre if and when it comes around.

anyone at any distance will be better off with real fibre...

bk

digiman is correct, fiber does fall off over distance, but it still performs vastly superior to copper and wireless which are largely useless for high speed broadband beyond 1km or so.

Given that Eircom plan on launching their GPON FTTH products from their now extensive 5000 FTTC cabinets, with a limit of 20km for GPON from these cabinets, I'd expect Eircom could connect 99% of the state with FTTH.

Even using a more conservative figure of 10km, it would still cover the vast majority of the country. I doubt there will be few premises more then 10km from a FTTC cab once Eircom finishes rolling them all out.

However that is simply talking about the technical limitations of FTTH. The next question is economic. Who is going to pay to connect up homes 10km from a FTTC cab?

Laying fiber costs significant money and someone is going to have to pay for it. To put that in perspective, BT charges almost €5 per meter to lay fiber for FTTH, so a 10km connection would cost almost €50,000!!!!!

At those sort of costs, I doubt Eircom will be connecting many homes outside normal high density urban areas in towns. At least not without subsidy from the National Broadband Plan.

I think it will be initially aimed mostly at people living in urban areas, but who are more then 1km from a FTTC cab, but probably no more then 2 to 3km from the cab. Also businesses in dense urban areas like Cork and Dublin. Perhaps even try and win back customers from UPC in these cities.

Gonzo

could this happen:

I am 1.8km from the nearest cabinet, not connected to it and receiving 10meg ADSL2+. there are no plans for FTTC here.

If the town of Dunshaughlin eventually gets upgraded to FTTH, they could in theory string this fibre along my road reaching my house as part of Eircom's FTTH rollout. Would this be part of the NBP or are they planning hooking everyone within 10-20km of named towns from the start?

lucernarian

Gonzo wrote: »

While that may be true in some cases, it is only available up to 2km if property is fed into the cabinet and even where it happens after about 1300m the speeds aren't great and in some cases slower than the DSL equivalent after 1500m+ in many cases. e.g. some people here who were/still are on 10-15meg ADSL2+ only getting up to 7meg on efibre.

Anyone more than 1km away will be much better served with real fibre if and when it comes around. This real fibre is very badly needed for homes on the edge of town, ribbon developments, business's/schools both urban and rural etc.

It is true, not "may be" true, at least in many reported cases and according to insiders posting here. Another poster said the range from the cabinet is 1000 metres when there's plenty of people who have efibre at distances greater than 1000 metres. It's also true that some people have lost speed as a result of moving to efibre but that's beside the point, the range of VDSL2 cabinets is still up to 2km line length.

lucernarian

bk wrote: »

digiman is correct, fiber does fall off over distance, but it still performs vastly superior to copper and wireless which are largely useless for high speed broadband beyond 1km or so.

Given that Eircom plan on launching their GPON FTTH products from their now extensive 5000 FTTC cabinets, with a limit of 20km for GPON from these cabinets, I'd expect Eircom could connect 99% of the state with FTTH.

Even using a more conservative figure of 10km, it would still cover the vast majority of the country. I doubt there will be few premises more then 10km from a FTTC cab once Eircom finishes rolling them all out.

However that is simply talking about the technical limitations of FTTH. The next question is economic. Who is going to pay to connect up homes 10km from a FTTC cab?

Laying fiber costs significant money and someone is going to have to pay for it. To put that in perspective, BT charges almost €5 per meter to lay fiber for FTTH, so a 10km connection would cost almost €50,000!!!!!

At those sort of costs, I doubt Eircom will be connecting many homes outside normal high density urban areas in towns. At least not without subsidy from the National Broadband Plan.

I think it will be initially aimed mostly at people living in urban areas, but who are more then 1km from a FTTC cab, but probably no more then 2 to 3km from the cab. Also businesses in dense urban areas like Cork and Dublin. Perhaps even try and win back customers from UPC in these cities.

There's no data on this side of the pond and little internationally to calculate the cost of rolling it out en masse to every customer, and if copper cables could be removed then there's a lot of money to be recouped in the price of the metal. BT are quoting punitive prices right now and Also going by exchange boundaries and cabinet placement, you'd be hard pressed to find customers outside of the most isolated areas of the state that are more than 6km away from a cabinet. Though the lasers for GPON are going to be in exchanges and the total distance might come uncomfortably close to 10 km.

Manc Red

I would be one of those cases. The cabinet that is serving us is 1.9km away. The closest cabinet is about 350 meters away.

What way does FTTH work? Lines that are like ours 1.9km away, will they be served from the same cabinet or will they serve you via a closer cabinet?

What kind of speeds would those lines be getting if they being served almost 2km away?

mass_debater

lucernarian wrote: »

It is true, not "may be" true, at least in many reported cases and according to insiders posting here. Another poster said the range from the cabinet is 1000 metres when there's plenty of people who have efibre at distances greater than 1000 metres. It's also true that some people have lost speed as a result of moving to efibre but that's beside the point, the range of VDSL2 cabinets is still up to 2km line length.

2000 metres, VDSL has a range of 2000m, eVDSL is lower, it's 1800m

lucernarian

mass_debater wrote: »

2000 metres, VDSL has a range of 2000m, eVDSL is lower, it's 1800m

Is there a difference between 2km and 2000 metres?!:eek:

Manc Red wrote:

What kind of speeds would those lines be getting if they being served almost 2km away?

The lowest efibre speed is 7 Mbits. I forget what upload is, I'm guessing 1 Mbit?!

ED E

lucernarian wrote: »

Is there a difference between 2km and 2000 metres?!:eek:


The lowest efibre speed is 7 Mbits. I forget what upload is, I'm guessing 1 Mbit?!

7d_1u for adaptives and 4d_1u for fixed IIRC.

lucernarian

ED E wrote: »

7d_1u for adaptives and 4d_1u for fixed IIRC.

For fixed, just 4 Mbit? When would that be used? There are lines out there that would get easily 7 Mbit at 3 km from the exchange, 4 Mbit fixed profiles almost seem like they're missing the point. 1 Mbit upstream really trumps 384 kbit upstream though, and fewer protocol overheads than ADSL connections in this country.

ED E

They dont sell it, its just there. Could be used on a faulting line to try and maintain some service.

lucernarian

ED E wrote: »

They dont sell it, its just there. Could be used on a faulting line to try and maintain some service.

So it's not even typically available to punters? There wasn't much point correcting me so :pac: The answer to a poster wondering what sort of speeds they'd get on a line near 2km away from the cab is indeed 7 Mbit.

Manc Red

I am currently offered efibre at 7Mb download. The problem is it is slower than what I get now (12Mb down) with regular broadband.

rob808

Manc Red wrote: »

I am currently offered efibre at 7Mb download. The problem is it is slower than what I get now (12Mb down) with regular broadband.

That crazy how is it slower than adsl+2 at a distance?

SpaceTime

damienirel wrote: »

Also afaik Verizon only operates out of a few east coast states it only covers a % so if you want to do fair comparisons you would need to start there.
Overall my point is before we get carried away with Eircom marketing we are pretty far behind. That is all.

Verizon's PSTN serves an area of about 27 million households. Of which about 5 million are on FiOS.

Also FiOS isn't exclusively FTTH, they're using vectored VDSL2 in some installations, similar to eircom's efibre. This happens especially in apartment buildings where rewiring is complex.

Standard 25 Mbit/s 25 Mbit/s
Quantum 50 Mbit/s 50 Mbit/s
Quantum 75 Mbit/s 75 Mbit/s
Quantum 150 Mbit/s 150 Mbit/s
Quantum 300 Mbit/300 Mbit/s
Quantum 500 Mbit/s 500 Mbit/s

Meanwhile AT&T Uverse is predominately VDSL2 FTTN.

Realistically, comparisons with the U.S. leave Ireland looking fairly well positioned, especially when you consider the low densities. UPC also knocks the socks off Comcast! I've recently experienced both! UPC internet is much better.

MBSnr

mass_debater wrote: »

2000 metres, VDSL has a range of 2000m, eVDSL is lower, it's 1800m

Going to be an awful lot of disappointed people out there....including me... direct fed but @ over 2Km on ADSL1.....

bk

And Verizon FIOS is expensive, to give you an idea, their 50Mb/s cost $65 excluding, tax, equipment charges and other fees, for just internet (no TV or phone). You would be looking at about €80 per month all included!!

Verizon 300Mb/s costs $195 per month, probably more like €240 all included!!

UPC 240Mb/s + unlimited phone calls for €45 looks pretty excellent compared to that.

bk

MBSnr wrote: »

Going to be an awful lot of disappointed people out there....including me... direct fed but @ over 2Km on ADSL1.....

It is a pity that they don't seem to be able to get ADSL2+ speeds from VDSL over 2km, that would be useful for people like you.

However not all hope is lost of you. If they run fiber to your exchange for VDSL, that will at least improve backhaul congestion, specially if your exchange was one previously feed by wireless point to point connection.

Also hopefully they will move around some of the ADSL2+ DSLAMS from exchanges where demand for it has significantly decreased due to people moving over to VDSL to exchanges like yours where ADSL2+ was never installed.

While not VDSL like speeds, it could still give you a nice boost.

MBSnr

bk wrote: »

It is a pity that they don't seem to be able to get ADSL2+ speeds from VDSL over 2km, that would be useful for people like you.

However not all hope is lost of you. If they run fiber to your exchange for VDSL, that will at least improve backhaul congestion, specially if your exchange was one previously feed by wireless point to point connection.

Also hopefully they will move around some of the ADSL2+ DSLAMS from exchanges where demand for it has significantly decreased due to people moving over to VDSL to exchanges like yours where ADSL2+ was never installed.

While not VDSL like speeds, it could still give you a nice boost.

The exch is supposedly already fibre enabled and has been for a long time - although it still slows down at peak times.

Do you know if Eircom have plans to move ADSL2 equipment into ADSL1 exchanges or is this just wistful thinking on our part?

bk

MBSnr wrote: »

Do you know if Eircom have plans to move ADSL2 equipment into ADSL1 exchanges or is this just wistful thinking on our part?

We have already seen reports of it happening here on boards.

It wouldn't make sense to leave empty ADSL2+ DSLAMS sitting in VDSL exchanges, when it would be relatively easy and straight forward to move them to another exchange. I'm sure Eircom would want to make the most of their existing assets.

SpaceTime

MBSnr wrote: »

The exch is supposedly already fibre enabled and has been for a long time - although it still slows down at peak times.

Do you know if Eircom have plans to move ADSL2 equipment into ADSL1 exchanges or is this just wistful thinking on our part?

It certainly doesn't make sense to having it sitting in exchanges as a comfortable home for spiders and it's just rack-mounted gear, so it's easy enough to move.

I would say it's a case of needing to ensure that a certain % of users have moved to FTTC before they can move anything. Then it's just a case of actually physically moving the equipment and setting it up.

Also it's more complicated than just ripping out the line cards and moving them somewhere else. There are different vendors involved and you also have to keep the ADSL2+ services running at the donor exchange. These things need routers, servers and other gear to keep them running. So, just moving some of the gear might not be possible.

In some cases, it might be possible ... there are just lots of variables much anything else!

Also, equipment costs have dropped, so it might even make more sense to just buy new gear for the small exchange. It'd certainly be newer, smaller, less problematic etc.

In a lot of smaller rural exchanges, it's not lack of ADSL2+ equipment that's the bottle neck, it's their link to the core network that's the issue. They need modern high capacity, properly IP based fibre links added.

There may well be ADSL2+ capable gear already in some of those exchanges that hast just never been switched into that mode as there's insufficient capacity to support it anyway.

Bear in mind, that eircom has been using fibre since the 1980s. There are plenty of fibre-linked exchanges that would have very limited capacity as they're possibly still using 1990s technology.

In the early days of ADSL (1st generation) most phone companies (including Eircom and BT in the UK) just plugged it into their existing ATM network. As speeds increased and demand went up they had to move to all IP networks.

Effectively the technologies have switched places. The first generation had IP for internet products running over legacy ATM networks on virtual circuits. The current situation is that the ATM/TDM gear is connected over all IP networks on virtual circuits.

This is a bit like the period when they were changing from analogue to digital in the 80s and early 90s. You've two parallel but interconnected networks working side by side - In the network today you've a a modern all-IP core network, and most nodes already all-IP and some nodes that are still connected on legacy non-IP networks using ATM over radio and fibre.

You've also got legacy equipment sitting on top of the modern core network using various forms of virtualisation and adaptation to keep things running smoothly even though the technologies have moved on. These networks are too fundamental, complex and too valuable as capital investments to just rip out and replace in one go. So, they're being replaced bit by bit.

The voice network is most likely being virtualised and turned into some kind of hybrid of VoIP and PSTN. I know they've been replacing elements of the traditional TDM circuit switching network (exchanges that provide voice/ISDN) with blade-clusters hosting soft switches. So, basically the intelligent bits of the network are very modern, even if your local voice exchange is older tech.

Also bear in mind that a lot of small rural exchanges have fewer customers than 1 efibre cabinet in a housing estate! This is why we definitely need alternative technologies and subsidisation of rural broadband. Otherwise, it just won't work.

It's going to have to be driven more effectively by government rather than leaving it up to commercial providers like eircom and UPC, who seem uninterested in it generally because it's not profitable.

lucernarian

SpaceTime wrote: »

Verizon's PSTN serves an area of about 27 million households. Of which about 5 million are on FiOS.

Also FiOS isn't exclusively FTTH, they're using vectored VDSL2 in some installations, similar to eircom's efibre. This happens especially in apartment buildings where rewiring is complex.

Standard 25 Mbit/s 25 Mbit/s
Quantum 50 Mbit/s 50 Mbit/s
Quantum 75 Mbit/s 75 Mbit/s
Quantum 150 Mbit/s 150 Mbit/s
Quantum 300 Mbit/300 Mbit/s
Quantum 500 Mbit/s 500 Mbit/s

Meanwhile AT&T Uverse is predominately VDSL2 FTTN.

Realistically, comparisons with the U.S. leave Ireland looking fairly well positioned, especially when you consider the low densities. UPC also knocks the socks off Comcast! I've recently experienced both! UPC internet is much better.

The PSTN network is not footprint, which is at over 18 million households by Q3 2013, of which 5.9 million are FiOS subscribers (http://www.fiercetelecom.com/story/verizons-shammo-doubts-google-fiber-will-build-fios-areas/2013-05-30, http://www.fiercecable.com/story/verizon-gains-135k-fios-tv-and-173k-fios-internet-subs-q3-2013/2013-10-17)
It's hard to find out what proportion of FiOS customers are using VDSL2 for the final, customer-side connection but if we assume it's a moderate proportion then still, at least of their total subscriber base has immediate access to GPON based services. That still surpasses either eircom's or Vodafone/ESB plans as a proportion of households after completion of each rollout's phase 1. But we're starting at a low point so obviously an ISP with ten year's headstart will have the advantage, and Verizon's areas include New York.

SpaceTime

lucernarian wrote: »

The PSTN network is not footprint, which is at over 18 million households by Q3 2013, of which 5.9 million are FiOS subscribers (http://www.fiercetelecom.com/story/verizons-shammo-doubts-google-fiber-will-build-fios-areas/2013-05-30, http://www.fiercecable.com/story/verizon-gains-135k-fios-tv-and-173k-fios-internet-subs-q3-2013/2013-10-17)
It's hard to find out what proportion of FiOS customers are using VDSL2 for the final, customer-side connection but if we assume it's a moderate proportion then still, at least of their total subscriber base has immediate access to GPON based services. That still surpasses either eircom's or Vodafone/ESB plans as a proportion of households after completion of each rollout's phase 1. But we're starting at a low point so obviously an ISP with ten year's headstart will have the advantage, and Verizon's areas include New York.

How's the PSTN footprint not the footprint?
I mean, that's like saying only efibre areas are eircom's required covered footprint.

Verizon runs the PSTN exchanges for 27m customers. Are they abandoning some areas?

ED E

Think lucer is confusing consumer base or subscriber figures with footprint.

lucernarian

ED E wrote: »

Think lucer is confusing consumer base or subscriber figures with footprint.

I should think not! the links I attached demonstrate the figures I quoted. I think i may have added confusion by my first line as I should have said the PSTN network is not the FiOS footprint, which is at 18 million (though then the 39% penetration rate in FiOS-enabled areas wouldn't add up).

How's the PSTN footprint not the footprint?
I mean, that's like saying only efibre areas are eircom's required covered footprint.

Verizon runs the PSTN exchanges for 27m customers. Are they abandoning some areas?

I don't understand how the more up-to-date figures show Ireland in a currently favourable context, as availability of FiOS is near 2 of every 3 lines and probably over half if the vdsl2 drops are excluded. Both ESB and eircom will not be covering anything like that proportion after the respective Phase 1s are complete. UPCs availability is lower too than the combined GPON and VDSL2 services than the area which Verizon operate in. Since UPC completed their rebuild programme in 2011/2012, growth in availability has been scant.

bk

lucernarian wrote: »

I don't understand how the more up-to-date figures show Ireland in a currently favourable context, as availability of FiOS is near 2 of every 3 lines and probably over half if the vdsl2 drops are excluded. Both ESB and eircom will not be covering anything like that proportion after the respective Phase 1s are complete. UPCs availability is lower too than the combined GPON and VDSL2 services than the area which Verizon operate in. Since UPC completed their rebuild programme in 2011/2012, growth in availability has been scant.

lucernarian, Verizon FiOS only covers a small percentage of the US, so you aren't making a like to like comparison.

There are 117 million homes in the US, so Verizons 6 million homes represents just 17% of US homes.

Outside of Verizon FiOS and Google Fiber, the majority of the US is serviced by AT&T, Comcast and TWC and things are far from rosy with these companies.

As a comparison, once complete, both Eircoms and ESB phase 1 rollouts, will cover about 40% of homes.

And you seem to be ignoring the ridiculously high prices of the Verizon FiOS services, between 2 and 4 times more expensive then here.

On the whole, the Irish broadband market is looking a lot healthier then the US.

damienirel

bk wrote: »

lucernarian, Verizon FiOS only covers a small percentage of the US, so you aren't making a like to like comparison.

There are 117 million homes in the US, so Verizons 6 million homes represents just 17% of US homes.

Outside of Verizon FiOS and Google Fiber, the majority of the US is serviced by AT&T, Comcast and TWC and things are far from rosy with these companies.

As a comparison, once complete, both Eircoms and ESB phase 1 rollouts, will cover about 40% of homes.

And you seem to be ignoring the ridiculously high prices of the Verizon FiOS services, between 2 and 4 times more expensive then here.

On the whole, the Irish broadband market is looking a lot healthier then the US.

Can you explain how it's "healthier"? Also this:

bk wrote:

Netindex.com, places the US 26th in the world with an average download speed of 36Mb/s and Ireland not far behind in 40th with an average download speed of 27Mb/s

So if we're in a race and you come 26th and I come 40th? - that's a whole 14 places behind.

Everything being claimed here is based on when Eircom and Esb complete. Can you not afford the same to Verizon comcast et al? Maybe when they're complete they'll be a lot healthier too?

lucernarian

bk wrote: »

lucernarian, Verizon FiOS only covers a small percentage of the US, so you aren't making a like to like comparison.

There are 117 million homes in the US, so Verizons 6 million homes represents just 17% of US homes.

Outside of Verizon FiOS and Google Fiber, the majority of the US is serviced by AT&T, Comcast and TWC and things are far from rosy with these companies.

As a comparison, once complete, both Eircoms and ESB phase 1 rollouts, will cover about 40% of homes.

And you seem to be ignoring the ridiculously high prices of the Verizon FiOS services, between 2 and 4 times more expensive then here.

On the whole, the Irish broadband market is looking a lot healthier then the US.

It's not like the baby bells can simply start expanding their footprint into each other's turf but I accept the point about the US market as a whole being in a weak situation. But it's a heavily fragmented country with many operators and evidence from the US "as a whole" likewise doesn't necessarily offer proof of such technological superiority. They just aren't easily comparable. When I make a more specific comparison between any one American operator and any one Irish operator, the American one could have more advanced services than the Irish one in some cases. I don't think it can be flatly claimed that Irish broadband services are superior to U.S. ones when some operators have extensive GPON availability in the areas they operate while other ones don't.

SpaceTime

lucernarian wrote: »

It's not like the baby bells can simply start expanding their footprint into each other's turf but I accept the point about the US market as a whole being in a weak situation. But it's a heavily fragmented country with many operators and evidence from the US "as a whole" likewise doesn't necessarily offer proof of such technological superiority. They just aren't easily comparable. When I make a more specific comparison between any one American operator and any one Irish operator, the American one could have more advanced services than the Irish one in some cases. I don't think it can be flatly claimed that Irish broadband services are superior to U.S. ones when some operators have extensive GPON availability in the areas they operate while other ones don't.

Well, it's s bit like talking about the EU market ... You go from high density FTTH to dial up speeds depending on the specific circumstances.

In general comparisons with small dense markets like HK aren't very realistic though.

So far, Ireland basically has no serious FTTH other than a couple of plans.

UPC is decent and eircom FTTC isn't bad.

Ireland definitely compares well to the UK now but it's going to take widespread FTTH deployment to make a big impact.

Incidentally, there's nothing stopping UPC from going to full fibre too ... They've fibres running very close to end users. I'm sure if they wanted to offer gigabit connectivity they could just start direct connecting end users

ED E

SpaceTime wrote: »

Incidentally, there's nothing stopping UPC from going to full fibre too ... They've fibres running very close to end users. I'm sure if they wanted to offer gigabit connectivity they could just start direct connecting end users

With EuroDocsis 3.1 they really dont need to move to FTTH yet, they can do Gig on coax first. The HFC nodes area even more dense than VDSL cabs though, so if the fiber is there (have they overprovisioned as much as eircom?) then rolling out the last 100m will be easy.

murphaph

netindex has a huge flaw of course....it only shows actual speeds experienced by current users and Ireland is definitely an "emerging market" in terms of broadband.

Eircom's VDSL rollout has been very rapid. I suspect many many customers who can avail of improved speeds over VDSL are simply not yet doing so and so won't help Ireland's netindex score. I prefer to rely on the akamai state of the internet reports for a more detailed analysis.

My mother would be your classic example. Had ADSL running at around 3Mbps down, God knows what up. All her neighbours would have had the same. She only upgraded to VDSL as I pushed her to to improve the skype experience at our end! I suspect many of her neighbours simply haven't bothered upgrading.

Nollog

damienirel wrote: »

Can you explain how it's "healthier"?

I'd imagine she meant healthier in that there's on-going works and competition here in Ireland, whereas in the US, they're busy fighting local communities in court, rather than improving their services and reacting to competition in a "healthy" way.
ie, expanding gpon, speeds, quality, etc.

bk

/\/ollog wrote: »

I'd imagine she meant healthier in that there's on-going works and competition here in Ireland, whereas in the US, they're busy fighting local communities in court, rather than improving their services and reacting to competition in a "healthy" way.
ie, expanding gpon, speeds, quality, etc.

That is exactly what I meant. Broadband in the US costs vastly more then here in Ireland and there is very little real competition between companies, with most areas being a monopoly or at best a cossy duopoly.

- Comcast is the largest broadband provider in the US, with 21% of the market (56% of the market for the new FCC definition of broadband being minimum 25Mb/s!)

Most people are on Comcast at about 25Mb/s which costs about €70 per month!

The highest speed Comcast offers is 150Mb/s and it costs about €100 per month!

Comcast has a 300GB cap in most of its markets!!

TWC (12.1%) and the other small cable operators offer similar packages and products.

All very unimpressive compared to the 240Mb/s for €44 offered by UPC on cable here in Ireland.

- The next largest operator is AT&T (17.2%)

They use ADSL2+ and VDSL1 FTTC similar to Eircom but it maxes out at just 45Mb/s!! And that 45Mb/s is only in selected areas, otherwise it maxes out at 18Mb/s!!! Again this comes with a 250GB cap.

That all compares very unfavourably with Eircom VDSL2 that operates at up to 100Mb/s and no cap.

- Really the only bright spot in the US broadband market is Verizon FiOS and Goggle Fiber. Verizon however only represents 9% of the US broadband market and as I pointed out earlier it is extremely expensive compared to Ireland.

Also Verizon has stopped it's FTTH rollout.

So in summary, the vast majority of people in the US are stuck on Comcast, TWC and At&T with speeds at best half what we get here in Ireland, paying at least twice what we do here in Ireland and stuck on crappy 250 to 300GB caps!

By comparison the Irish market is VERY competitive. You have UPC and Eircom competing aggressively with one another. Both UPC and Eircom have rolled out best in class technologies (Vectorised VDSL2 and EuroDOCSIS 3.0), which are much better then their equivalent companies in the US (mostly still stuck on ADSL2+/VDSL1 and DOCSIS 2.0).

You have both the ESB and Eircom about to rollout significant new FTTH networks and UPC likely poised to push DOCSIS 3.0 to it's limits, quickly followed by Gigabit DOCSIS 3.1.

And don't forget the US has no wholesale (bitsream) broadband market and LLU (Vodafone, Sky, etc.).

With the exception of rural Ireland (and rural US is no better off, I can assure you), Ireland's broadband market is much healthier.

The US broadband market is very sick, for the most part there is little competition, far too high prices and severely lagging in modern technology deployment and network investment.

This is the reason Google launched it's Google Fiber service. Google doesn't really have any interest in being a teleco, but it saw that the US broadband market was stagnating badly and has started introducing it's Gigabit fiber product to try and spur the rest of the market into action to compete with it.

bk

ED E wrote: »

With EuroDocsis 3.1 they really dont need to move to FTTH yet, they can do Gig on coax first. The HFC nodes area even more dense than VDSL cabs though, so if the fiber is there (have they overprovisioned as much as eircom?) then rolling out the last 100m will be easy.

I expect there will be an intermediary step where they can get more out of DOCSIS 3.0 with relatively little difficulty and investment (comparatively).

I think they can push D3.0 to at least 500Mb/s, maybe even as high 800Mb/s, by simply increasing the number of channels they use. This would require new modems for speeds over 240Mb/s, but not a massive change.

D3.1 is actually a much bigger change, the .1 is deceiving, it is more like DOCSIS 4.0 or even 10, it is such a radical change.

Certainly it would require switching off the analogue TV channels and perhaps even changing to a switched digital video (SDV) or even fully IPTV platform to get the most out of D3.1. It will be a big investment and UPC and all cable operators will need decide if they want to make this investment or jump over to FTTH.

ED E

They can certainly push 400-440 without any changes now. Thats what they're drip feeding to at the minute (VDSL doesnt cause any pressure to go faster). Sure business are already running 500 no?

Im aware that 3.1 is a name to try and not scare the cable ops as they got burned before. But really its not a HUGE upgrade. Ship out new CPE then swap out the CMTS over night. It can be done on a localized rolling basis.

People dont like their walls being drilled, thats a big plus for maintaining the copper.

bk

ED E wrote: »

They can certainly push 400-440 without any changes now. Thats what they're drip feeding to at the minute (VDSL doesnt cause any pressure to go faster). Sure business are already running 500 no?

The current DOCSIS 3.0 modems (CPE's) support 8 channels and I believe 240Mb/s is about the limit of 8 channels. Actually it is 440Mb/s in bandwidth for 8 channels, but that is shared with your neighbours, so they don't realistically advertise it as that.

I've read elsewhere that in order to do 500Mb/s in Poland, they built a new custom modem that had two chipsets in it, so it could handle 16 channels, in order to get to 500Mb/s (advertised, 880Mb/s total bandwidth shared).

Virgin Medias new Super Hub in the UK now supports 16x4 channels, so I expect UPC will eventually get the same here.

I've also read elsewhere that 24x8 channels chipsets and modems are starting to hit the market and looking at UPC's current frequency allocation, it looks like they can just about squeeze 24 channels in there. Which is why I think they can do up to 750Mb/s to 800Mb/s with D3.0.

I've even read about 32x8 channel chipsets and modems becoming available, which would get them up to 1Gb/s, but I don't think they have enough space for 32 channels, without first switching off some of the analogue channels.

ED E wrote: »

Im aware that 3.1 is a name to try and not scare the cable ops as they got burned before. But really its not a HUGE upgrade. Ship out new CPE then swap out the CMTS over night. It can be done on a localized rolling basis.

Oh it is way, way more complicated then that!

D3.1 can be phased:

Phased 1: You would at least need to switch off the analogue TV channels to give the extra space needed, D3.1 can then use this space + the D3.0 channels + new improved QAM to get speeds in the region of 1 to 2Gb/s

It would be a business decision to switch off the analogue TV channels or not.

Phase 2: You would need to switch the digital TV service to either a SDV or IPTV TV service using MPEG 4 or better for all channels. This would then free up lots more space for broadband. However doing so would entail replacing almost all the UPC TV boxes out there with new ones that could support SDV/IPTV like the Horizon boxes.

That would obviously involve a big expense.

Phase 3: Replace the coax cable and all the filters, etc. with ones that support 1.3Ghz frequencies.

That gives lots more space for bandwidth. But obviously involves massive expense of replacing cables, etc.

I can certainly see UPC going to at least D3.0 16x4 channel modems, seems like a no brainer relatively easy upgrade.

They might also push into D3.0 32x8 and/or hybrid (phase 1) D3.1 modems and switch off some or all of the analogue channels to make space for 1 to 2 Gb/s services.

However D3.1 phase 2 and 3 quickly becomes expensive and maybe the point where it starts to make more sense to start changing over to FTTH.

As for them not wanting to drill into peoples homes, another alternative that is emerging technologies, Distributed CMTS and Distributed CCAP. The idea is to basically take the CMTS/CCAP out of the headend and instead put them in the building basements and street cabinets feed by fiber. Similar to FTTC or even FTTDp, but with the benefit of much higher bandwidth available on coax. Multi giagbit speeds should be easily doable with this sort of technology, without needing to replace the cable entering peoples homes. Our friends Huawei have been developing this technology.

damienirel

bk wrote: »

This is the reason Google launched it's Google Fiber service. Google doesn't really have any interest in being a teleco, but it saw that the US broadband market was stagnating badly and has started introducing it's Gigabit fiber product to try and spur the rest of the market into action to compete with it.

Google make phones and tablets too have built a mobile OS they talk about driverless cars google glasses etc. Google do this as a distraction - the only business they are really in is search and advertising - I'm pretty sure the fibre product is the same as many of their distractions a way of finding out what people are searching for and trying to advertise to them.

ED E

Always the wealth of information BK. Will have to educate myself more on HFC once I've finished my current reading on another topic.

lucernarian

A little slightly off-topic point

http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/Presos/Cambridge_The_State_of_the_art_in_congestion_control.pdf

http://www.cablelabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Active_Queue_Management_Algorithms_DOCSIS_3_0.pdf

In the gigabit range, this is less of a priority but it's good to see a more thorough rethink on the latency issue taking root. Hopefully more ISPs take a leaf out of free.fr's book and implement the likes of FQ Codel in their routers. I've had problems with this especially on modems and routers that followed after the old Zyxel usb modems or the netopia 2247 and after much looking, getting a router that's flashable with an alternative firmware seems the main option for now.

KOR101

I don't remember anyone posting this news.

Fitch Ratings has upgraded eircom Holdings (Ireland) Limited's (eircom) Long-term Issuer Default Rating (IDR) to 'B' from 'B-' and assigned a Stable Outlook. At the same time the agency has upgraded the company's secured bank debt and the 9.25% senior secured bonds due 2020 to 'B+' from 'B'.

The rating upgrade reflects our view that eircom has delivered the planned transformation of its operations; that revenues look increasingly likely to stabilise and that cost initiatives will improve operating cash flows. While eircom's leveraged balance sheet is unusual for an incumbent telecom, the business transformation and stabilising revenue outlook is a significant achievement in a sector where top-line declines and margin pressure remain a risk. Plans to increase its fibre investment moderate the potential to generate positive free cash flow (FCF) and reduce leverage in the near term. Fitch now expects funds from operations (FFO) net adjusted leverage to remain flat at 5.0x-5.1x between 2015 and 2016, compared with previous expectations that deleveraging would begin in 2016. This ratio is nonetheless consistent with the leveraged telecom peer group at the 'B' rating level.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Operational Transformation Advanced Management have, in Fitch's view, delivered on plans to transform the company's business profile. Investment in fibre is advanced with its VDSL network passing 1.1 million homes and on track to reach 1.6 million by mid-2016; more than 70% of Ireland's homes. LTE spectrum has been acquired and coverage achieved compares well with competitors The launch of its TV product in 2013 has shown good early signs of take-up and eircom remains the only operator in the market with a viable quad-play offer at present, although this will change with the launch of cable operator UPC's MVNO mobile business. While market competition - in both fixed and mobile - is high, it will, in Fitch's view, remain rational. The consolidation of Three and O2 Ireland reduces the mobile market to a three-player market and could moderate competitive pressures.

Revenue & EBITDA Increasingly Stable While year-on-year revenue trends remain negative but improving, sequential trends show increasing signs of stabilising, evident in both the fixed and mobile businesses. While market competition remains high and eircom continues to lose retail fixed accesses, it benefits from a growing wholesale business, capitalising on the depth and scope of its incumbent network, along with an improving mobile subscriber mix, ongoing cost rationalisation and improving margin trend. While the Vodafone/ESB JV's announced fibre-to-the home (FTTH) plans present medium- term risks, both in terms of Vodafone's own convergent offer and potential for an alternative wholesale offer, eircom has reacted with a similarly dimensioned FTTH target and, in our view, is likely to deliver its plan sooner than the JV. Capex Remains High, FCF Constrained Eircom has announced plans for an FTTH network covering 500,000 homes - in Fitch's view a defensive reaction to the Vodafone/ESB JV. The advanced stage of eircom's fibre to the cabinet build - already passing 1.1 million homes - and the use of a single network supplier suggest that eircom is in a good position to install deep levels of fibre more rapidly than the JV; the latter is only expected to start network construction in 2H15. Eircom conversely expects to launch FTTH commercially in August 2015. Increased investment will, however, impact eircom's FCF in both 2015 and 2016 at least, and likely to result in higher levels of spend than we had previously assumed. Our base case now does not envisage a mid-to-high single FCF margin till 2017, one year later than previously expected. Medium-term Deleveraging Higher capex spend over the next two to three years will constrain FCF with modest deleveraging now not expected in our base case till 2017. Higher capex is nonetheless in Fitch's view a necessary defensive action, which under eircom's previous private equity ownership it was unable to do. In a fairly small but competitive market we feel that network investment, which should ultimately lead to a better customer experience (and wholesale offer), is important. Fitch does not view a potentially flat leverage profile between 2015 and 2016, as an impediment to the upgrade given the business and operational transformation that has been delivered.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS -Stabilisation of revenues in 2016 - a combination of flat fixed line and low single-digit growth in mobile -EBITDA margin stable to moderately improving, benefitting from an extensive headcount rationalisation and ongoing focus on efficiency; mobile to benefit from shift in the post-paid mix -Capex to remain high through 2017, driven by FTTH investment plans - EUR290m in 2015; remaining above EUR250m in 2016, before trending down to 15% of revenues over the longer term -Voluntary leaver and restructuring costs largely complete in 2015 -Zero dividends; IPO possible over a two-year horizon but not built into assumptions -Liquidity largely provided by cash - EUR173m at end-December 2014; company expected to be modestly FCF-positive from 2016

RATING SENSITIVITIES Positive: Future developments that could lead to positive rating action include: -FFO net adjusted leverage approaching 4.5x and expected to remain at or below this level on a sustained basis -FCF margin in the mid-to-high single digit range on a sustained basis -Ongoing revenue stability and EBITDA improvement - most likely achieved through a stabilisation of fixed key performance indicators (KPIs) and improving mobile trends Negative: Future developments that could lead to negative rating action include: -FFO net adjusted leverage approaching 5.5x with an ongoing deteriorating trend accompanied by negative FCF, which would lead to a downgrade. This would imply the stabilisation so far achieved is not sustained and/or that competition is continuing to force higher levels of capex than envisaged in our base case. Deteriorating operating trends would be a greater risk. -A material reversal in operating KPI trends - key measures being fixed access losses, overall broadband accesses and the mix in pre- and post-paid mobile customers. In our view it is important that momentum in overall (combined direct and wholesale) broadband access continues, while the shift in the post-paid mix will support further mobile margin expansion.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/04/27/idINFit92081020150427

Johnboy1951

Reasonably positive and a good base to get their loans restructured ...... which should see them forge ahead with FTTH as soon as they can in order to get as much ahead of ESB/Vodafone as they can.