NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

rob808

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

"Most extreme rural areas" might be slightly exaggerated :P

The new villages announced by eircom have anywhere from 300-1000+ people, so not awfully rural. The ones that are left for the NBP are the most extreme rural areas.

I still think it's amazing to think areas of these sizes will have FTTH in 4-5 years...

yea Eircom avoid the most extreme areas leaving them on NBP wonder why?it cost them to much money they left the scrap that is now the NBP.

chris_ie

PeadarB wrote: »

Chris Churchill is on the NBP map as is. It would make no sense to me if eircom decide to do Churchill with FTTH and not capture all properties on the 10km route in between. It is a relatively densly populated area compared to most rural areas. As far as I can determine the core fibre will have to be run from Letterkenny exchange. It will be a ribbon rollout like Belcarra in Mayo. Moat did say that "Speeds of up to 1Gb/s will be available through the use of ‘end to end’ fibre to the home (FTTH) technology... The homes and businesses to be served by this investment are largely ribbon style developments..." If eircom don't get you NBP will.

Ah now don't be getting my hopes up Yeah there are quite a lot of houses out here. We were on the NBP but will be interesting to see if eircom cover us sooner. Fingers crossed.

funnyname

Kineilty cross isn't a village, it covers the arse end (on the way to the Cliffs of Mother) of Liscannor so will have fibre while the village waits for the NBP as its nearest exchange is Lahinch 5km away.

Seems to me that Eircom are gambling that they will win the NBP and can then join the dots with government money. A sound business plan, the ball is defo in their court.

PeadarB

chris_ie wrote: »

Ah now don't be getting my hopes up Yeah there are quite a lot of houses out here. We were on the NBP but will be interesting to see if eircom cover us sooner. Fingers crossed.

I hope you don't have to keep them crossed for too long. We're blessed here in town with good speeds but I'm all too aware of the difficulties friends of mine have out your way.

bk

ED E wrote: »

Think you're on the money here. The radio exchanges are pretty much useless, fail in high winds and no doubt lead to lots of complaints to comreg (Id be on to them weekly if I was unfortunate enough to live near one). Theyre going to have to get them onto core fibre at some point, may as well be now and reduce the faults load and thus field staff costs. Long term that reduces monthly outgoings and helps profitability. Moat is the former CFO, he's no doubt looking at the balance sheets and playing the long game.

Exactly. I've read a report comparing the cost of FTTH compared to Hybrid Fibre Coax (UPC type networks).

It found that the annual operational cost of a hfc network to be in the region of $1100 per plant mile, while a passive FTTH network opertIonal costs were just $85 per mile!!

Massively cheaper. The only issue is the high upfront cost of rolling out FTTH versus just sweating your existing hfc network. However even including this, the authors found that the hfc network is only cheaper for the first 13 years, after that the caped of replacing it with FTTH is paid off and the low open cost of FTTH makes it cheaper then hfc.

Now this report dealt with hfc instead of twisted pair copper. But I expect the opex costs of these rural areas is the same or even higher.

Really replacing copper with fiver is a no brainier, the only reason not to is short term, Wall Street, next quarter thinking. Anyone who thinks about these networks long term can easily see that replacing copper with FTTH is the best economic decision.

Perhaps Eircom is finally starting to think long term.

Copper was the technology for the last 50 to 100 years, FTTH is the technology that will power us for the next 50 to 100 years.

murphaph

Eircom appears to have a CEO who is thinking long term alright. Lucky for Ireland. I also buy into the idea that they took a long hard look at their infrastructure and realised that it's in tatters and these places have the worst of it. A decision was then made to upgrade straight to FTTH. Anyone claiming these places like Blacksod Co. Mayo are the low hanging fruit and "profitable" haven't looked at a map recently.

rob808

murphaph wrote: »

Eircom appears to have a CEO who is thinking long term alright. Lucky for Ireland. I also buy into the idea that they took a long hard look at their infrastructure and realised that it's in tatters and these places have the worst of it. A decision was then made to upgrade straight to FTTH. Anyone claiming these places like Blacksod Co. Mayo are the low hanging fruit and "profitable" haven't looked at a map recently.

I just wish the goverment would get on with it and get this tender done quickly and pick the best bidder that will look after the remaining 460,000 with best Technology FTTH.They should just give it to Eircom and get building it now of course our master the EU would not aload that:).

Eircom said on radio broadcast that 460,000 are the most rural areas and fall under the NBP so the other 300,000 are profitable to them.It up to our goverment now to keep the money NBP high because we're the most expensive to do.

lucernarian

joe_99 wrote: »

Customers in those areas would still exist regardless of eircom's move. NBP areas were going to be subsidised by the govt anyway. Now they have a smaller area to subsidise which make NBP more viable with the money they have set aside. This is positive for the tax payer. The more commercial build the better.

The more commercial build - the better I think. It's that they've nearly started from the bottom up in the list of places that have the most customers with poor broadband.

bk wrote:

Interesting point that no one has covered yet is this news really wipes out the wisps. The wisps might have been able to sue, delay or water down the NBP. But they can't do a thing against Eircom rolling out FTTH on a commercial basis. Who would continue to stay with a wisp if FTTH is available to them?

Well now, have a look at this from yesterday:

lucernarian wrote:

The more I look at the places selected, the more I wonder if these are places that have high uptake of fixed wireless providers or mobile internet providers at eircom's expense. There would be many people in the Lobinstown area for instance using Net1, and in Readypenny, people might use Net1 or Digiweb as there's no DSL available. At least they get some revenue out of those on 1 Mbit amber lines.

**Although one wireless operator I know welcomes it, and this one already resell eFibre services: http://www.net1.ie/net1-welcome-fibre-to-the-home-development/ the difference being that FTTH products may be cheaper on a wholesale basis compared to the costs of wireless infrastructure, and eircom still get the wholesale price rather than nothing at all!

lucernarian

murphaph wrote:

Eircom appears to have a CEO who is thinking long term alright. Lucky for Ireland. I also buy into the idea that they took a long hard look at their infrastructure and realised that it's in tatters and these places have the worst of it. A decision was then made to upgrade straight to FTTH. Anyone claiming these places like Blacksod Co. Mayo are the low hanging fruit and "profitable" haven't looked at a map recently.

It's worth considering what made them move from one situation with their abject (but uneven) neglect of plant to this apparently altruistic decision. It's just that any altruistic reasons have to be ignored... Eircom aren't in it for charity. I think it's certainly a gamble on their part, one which absolutely requires they win the NBP funding. They have seized this moment as presumably at least some of the outlay and costs that have arisen in the Belcarra project has inspired confidence in the capex per customer costs. There was much speculation and studies quoted before but eircom themselves seem to think the cost is of an order of magnitude cheaper than the claims on this forum.

By peppering remote or particularly small or awkward places to conduct a rollout - for a new network the remaining areas if served by Siro and ESB lines would probably pass through exchange areas that have eFibre even though they can't serve them. Eircom, by targeting exchange areas, can easily scale it to other nearby exchanges. Perhaps for less capex per household cost than this initial rollout, going by the many villages and less remote areas that have been sidelined. If they wanted to do that, I would still make different exchange choices though than what's happened.

There's also a bit of a hostage being taken with many of the have-nots now getting the gold treatment while neighbours in very similar areas get nothing. "Oh T.D., why can't our big village get anything while the little house on a hill near Upperchurch has faster broadband than half of Asia?"

Finally, eircom could have saved a few bob by picking unenabled VDSL targets (often small to medium-sized villages now) and simply moving straight to fibre - and saving themselves the costs of new DSLAMs and suchlike. But they're not really doing that...

yuloni

This post has been deleted.

rob808

yuloni wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

imagine if siro did something similar it ain't gona happen doh.The 460,000 are the most rural than the 300,000 picked.

Bookies Twist

Great points posted indeed. Previously I have posted about our efforts to get Eircom eFibre broadband. I live about 3 miles from New Ross, Co. Wexford. Most of the houses in our townsland have e fibre except ours the reason being we are the furtherest from the exchange and cabinet. Also last year the copper telephone was stolen 4 times by thieves leaving us without phone or broadband for some time. We are hoping we might get it under the NBP as we are in the NBP designated area. BUT because of the previous thefts of the copper phone lines I wonder might we ever get it all?? It is obviously very expensive for eircom to provide us with any type of service due to these factors, also if Eircom do get the tender for the NBP will this efibre use copper lines or will it be something else??

rob808

Bookies Twist wrote: »

Great points posted indeed. Previously I have posted about our efforts to get Eircom eFibre broadband. I live about 3 miles from New Ross, Co. Wexford. Most of the houses in our townsland have e fibre except ours the reason being we are the furtherest from the exchange and cabinet. Also last year the copper telephone was stolen 4 times by thieves leaving us without phone or broadband for some time. We are hoping we might get it under the NBP as we are in the NBP designated area. BUT because of the previous thefts of the copper phone lines I wonder might we ever get it all?? It is obviously very expensive for eircom to provide us with any type of service due to these factors, also if Eircom do get the tender for the NBP will this efibre use copper lines or will it be something else??

It most likely be either fibre or LTE because copper worth more than fibre given why people would steal it.

murphaph

rob808 wrote: »

imagine if siro did something similar it ain't gona happen doh.The 460,000 are the most rural than the 300,000 picked.

No, they aren't rob.

jd

rob808 wrote: »

It most likely be either fibre or LTE because copper worth more than fibre given why people would steal it.

eircom, and other telcos, have already said the best way to provide high speed broadband in rural areas is FTTH rather than some variant of DSL
http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/NR/rdonlyres/D2786222-4075-428C-83FE-95967A370E9B/0/SubmissionstoCFIforpublication22ndOctober2014FINAL.pdf

rob808

murphaph wrote: »

No, they aren't rob.

I hope your right . There article that say Fibre 60% cheaper than copper that couldn't be true could it plus thief are less likely to robbed fibre http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2015/05/boasting-the-savings-of-moving-from-copper-to-fibre-optic-broadband.html

bk

rob808 wrote: »

I hope your right . There article that say Fibre 60% cheaper than copper that couldn't be true could it plus thief are less likely to robbed fibre http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2015/05/boasting-the-savings-of-moving-from-copper-to-fibre-optic-broadband.html

The cost of fiber is cheaper then copper.

If you were building a new network where non exists, then FTTH is a no brainer. This is why countries like Lithuania, Latvia, etc. are almost all FTTH. They had little in the way of a telephone network under communism. So after the fall of the soviet union they skipped copper and went straight to FTTH.

The problem is for companies with existing copper networks. The maths become much more complicated then, you have to way up sweating the existing copper network versus the high initial cost of replacing it with FTTH.

lucernarian wrote: »

There was much speculation and studies quoted before but eircom themselves seem to think the cost is of an order of magnitude cheaper than the claims on this forum.

The thing is rolling out FTTH is VERY expensive, even the report I mentioned earlier indicates that. What we didn't consider is how much higher the opex cost of maintaining a copper network are then FTTH.

The up front cost of FTTH is still very high, but the difference in opex can help pay it off over a 13+ year period. The problem is you just need a company and management who are willing to think long term.

The areas being picked by Eircom certainly aren't low hanging NBP fruit. The NBP is basically anywhere in rural Ireland more then 500 meters from a VDSL cab. So the low hanging fruit would be large town and villages like Blarney, where VDSL and fiber already exists, but there are plenty of houses just outside the 500 meters of the cabs. After all these would be simple to run FTTH to from these existing cabs.

Instead we see Eircom targeting areas where core fiber is potentially miles away!

However this has lead me to think of something I didn't consider earlier.

Perhaps Eircom thought these areas were the ones most of risk of losing in the NBP bids. After all if Eircom has no pre-existing fiber in these areas, then they have no cost advantage versus SIRO to deliver FTTH to them, so by doing this they are taking this threat out of losing them in the NBP bids.

The NBP areas close to towns and villages where Eircom already has VDSL, like Blarney, Eircom feel they are more likely to win due to lower costs due to their existing fiber in place.

Now suddenly this makes a lot more sense to me. And to be honest I don't have any major issue with it. The reality is we will only have one FTTH network in rural Ireland. It doesn't really matter if Eircom or SIRO deliver it, as long as the government require that it is open to all companies to use in a fair and transparent manner.

In fact it looks like Eircom might be in a position to rollout FTTH much faster then SIRO. After all SIRO is a new company with little real world experience, that has yet to prove itself.

Not winning the NBP bids shouldn't really have any effect on SIRO's plans to rollout FTTH in non-UPC urban areas. In fact it might be an advantage to SIRO if Eircom are distracted rolling out FTTH in rural areas, while SIRO does the urban areas before Eircom starts on them.

rob808

Well siro is a new company but ESB with Vodafone one of the largest telecom company in EU,and Vodafone have plenty of experience plus there loaded maybe that why Eircom done this because siro a problem for them making another FTTH network and Eircom want to be the biggest.We really need to thank siro because this mightn't had happen for few years later FTTH .

rob808

jd wrote: »

eircom, and other telcos, have already said the best way to provide high speed broadband in rural areas is FTTH rather than some variant of DSL
http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/NR/rdonlyres/D2786222-4075-428C-83FE-95967A370E9B/0/SubmissionstoCFIforpublication22ndOctober2014FINAL.pdf

yea but if you read it they mention LTE could be use for a small Custer of houses on a end ribbon road but look like they might go the full FTTH if they win NBP.I know I don't want LTE that be a killer while other could get up to 1gb I be pissed haha:D

bk

rob808 wrote: »

Well siro is a new company but ESB with Vodafone one of the largest telecom company in EU,and Vodafone have plenty of experience plus there loaded maybe that why Eircom done this because siro a problem for them making another FTTH network and Eircom want to be the biggest.We really need to thank siro because this mightn't had happen for few years later FTTH .

Absolutely, I believe Eircom speed up and expanded their rollout of Efibre due to the threat of SIRO and Eircom are massively bringing forward ther planned rollout of FTTH due to the threat of SIRO. Competition is always good, which is why I hope SIRO managed to get off the ground and at least rollout their network in urban areas. Keep Eircom on their toes.

dbit

bk wrote: »

Absolutely, I believe Eircom send up and expanded their rollout of Efibre due to the threat of SIRO and Eircom are massively bringing forward ther planned rollout of FTTH due to the threat of SIRO. Competition is always good, which is why I hope SIRO managed to get off the ground and at least rollout their network in urban areas. Keep Eircom on their toes.

Exactly and im so happy the fire has been lit under Eircoms arse as they now start to look more appealing to me every day . No Siro would mean delayed and seriously over run deadlines. Not so much anymore.

rob808

Let say Eircom win it what stoping Eircom from using NBP money on the 300,000 Homes they announced could they do that or would goverment and EU be watching them?

dbit

A Watched pot never boils.

lucernarian

bk wrote: »

The thing is rolling out FTTH is VERY expensive, even the report I mentioned earlier indicates that. What we didn't consider is how much higher the opex cost of maintaining a copper network are then FTTH.

The up front cost of FTTH is still very high, but the difference in opex can help pay it off over a 13+ year period. The problem is you just need a company and management who are willing to think long term.

I think you need to consider the possibility that the capex costs for it are far lower than reports would have suggested as generated for other countries and from previous years. I suspect Moore's law is alive and well in fibre thanks to our Chinese vendors. Huawei and ZTE have been supplying the bulk of equipment to China Telecom's now-extensive FTTH rollout and this has been going on for a few years now. As well as vastly cheaper (and subcontracted) labour costs, the rollout is of a fairly rough-and-ready nature with fibre being draped along walls or attached to existing steel guide wires and loops from poles, beside coax and twisted pair. No extra digging needed pretty much anywhere!

Eircom are willing to use their overhead network to get the job done and this seems to be markedly different to BT's, or B4RN's methodology to roll it out.

If eircom aren't just pulling a massive bluff, they're investing €300 million extra (presumably the capex cost, with whatever small proportion would have been spent on "copper" capex subtracted). Supposing that figure is €150 million, the straightforward install cost per premises would be around €1500. That really does seem astonishingly low no matter how cheap Huawei are selling their equipment or how many crooked poles hold it up. If takeup is 40% of houses and the initial cost is maybe €3000 per paying customer, eircom taking an average €25 ARPU would make the money back from a takeup of 40% in 12-15 years. With the likelihood that this future network will eventually earn lots of money for eircom, I really hope some element of state ownership or profit-sharing will exist to account for this prospect.

KOR101

bk wrote: »

The up front cost of FTTH is still very high, but the difference in opex can help pay it off over a 13+ year period. The problem is you just need a company and management who are willing to think long term.

I don't think it's realistic to make a investment in this area which has a 13 year payback period, because the business environment is changing too rapidly, and it just isn't clear enough what things will look like say even 10 years out. For example, is widespread high quality 5G coverage not possible eventually.

I think Eircom can do this because of bundled services over fibre. The payback is actually much sooner. And, they would also be hoping for some monopoly pricing power for some of their network.

rob808

lucernarian wrote: »

I think you need to consider the possibility that the capex costs for it are far lower than reports would have suggested as generated for other countries and from previous years. I suspect Moore's law is alive and well in fibre thanks to our Chinese vendors. Huawei and ZTE have been supplying the bulk of equipment to China Telecom's now-extensive FTTH rollout and this has been going on for a few years now. As well as vastly cheaper (and subcontracted) labour costs, the rollout is of a fairly rough-and-ready nature with fibre being draped along walls or attached to existing steel guide wires and loops from poles, beside coax and twisted pair. No extra digging needed pretty much anywhere!

Eircom are willing to use their overhead network to get the job done and this seems to be markedly different to BT's, or B4RN's methodology to roll it out.

If eircom aren't just pulling a massive bluff, they're investing €300 million extra (presumably the capex cost, with whatever small proportion would have been spent on "copper" capex subtracted). Supposing that figure is €150 million, the straightforward install cost per premises would be around €1500. That really does seem astonishingly low no matter how cheap Huawei are selling their equipment or how many crooked poles hold it up. If takeup is 40% of houses and the initial cost is maybe €3000 per paying customer, eircom taking an average €25 ARPU would make the money back from a takeup of 40% in 12-15 years. With the likelihood that this future network will eventually earn lots of money for eircom, I really hope some element of state ownership or profit-sharing will exist to account for this prospect.

There think long term building a FTTH network in those location that have high up take of fixed wireless there gona make there money back by the low cost maintaince of fibre and power it use.I also think they done this show people in rural Ireland that if they win NBP they get best technology,of course I could be wrong.

lucernarian

KOR101 wrote: »

I don't think it's realistic to make a investment in this area which has a 13 year payback period, because the business environment is changing too rapidly, and it just isn't clear enough what things will look like say even 10 years out. For example, is widespread high quality 5G coverage not possible eventually.

I think Eircom can do this because of bundled services over fibre. The payback is actually much sooner. And, they would also be hoping for some monopoly pricing power for some of their network.

Re the first point, you can see long-term investments with the duration of GSM and UMTS licences often being awarded for 15 year stretches. Also, it's pretty hard to beat fibre for future-proofing. Nothing exists in any commercial or real-world sense that can beat fibre. Nothing can beat fibre for speed anyway - we're talking about something wireless (some kind of quantum effect even) that could match up to fibre but this would be decades away and the only advantage would be that you then take down the cables off poles. And fibre optic cables have little intrinsic material worth.

More importantly, high quality 5G coverage won't happen without nearly-ubiquitous fibre coverage in the first place.

Selling TV services over fibre will be an interesting proposition indeed, though their service would also allow competitors to offer some kind of IPTV service also. Ultimately, the big question is how the fibre network will be treated by ComReg as it will have Significant Market Power and ComReg have a bad track record of approving line rental increases whenever eircom came knocking. There will be intense competition for all the services over the cable, but not for the actual cable in the first place...

bk

KOR101 wrote: »

I don't think it's realistic to make a investment in this area which has a 13 year payback period, because the business environment is changing too rapidly, and it just isn't clear enough what things will look like say even 10 years out. For example, is widespread high quality 5G coverage not possible eventually.

I'm sorry but you couldn't be more wrong about this. The outlook for the telecoms market for the next 50 years is VERY clear.

5G is pure vapourware. Of course 5G will offer improved mobile broadband speeds just as 3G and 4G have. But it won't be a replacement for high quality fixed broadband, just as 3G and 4G aren't.

Wireless broadband is limited by fundamental laws of physics, you can't simply magic more wireless bandwidth out of thin air (pun attended!!). If you want to deliver a large amount of bandwidth over wireless, then the only way is with a very high density of cell sites. But the cost of such density of cell sites is such that it makes it far more expensive then FTTH.

light is literally the fastest thing in the universe!! And fibre is just a beam of light shot down a glass tube. It literally doesn't get better then that.

Yes, the standards of FTTH tecnology will change over time, GPON -> 10GPON -> 40 GPON, etc. But the beauty of FTTH is that once in place, all you have to do is replace the lasers in the exchange and home in order to take advantage of these upgrades. The fiber itself doesn't need to be touched. And as we know it is labour and civics that make up over 70% of the cost. So this makes future upgrades relatively straight forward and cheap.

The reality is whoever has a FTTH network, will dominate the telecoms market for the next 50 to 100 years. That is why everyone is rushing to deploy FTTH networks. They are rushing to lock down long term market monopoly.

That is why Vodafone is investing in fixed wired broadband networks throughout Europe. Investing in or buying up FTTH, FTTC or HFC networks. Even Vodafone know that fixed broadband is the future for telecoms.

rob808

I wonder what the NBP map will look like when they take 300,000 homes getting FTTH Out.How long would that take them to do that?

chris_ie

rob808 wrote: »

I wonder what the NBP map will look like when they take 300,000 homes getting FTTH Out.How long would that take them to do that?

Aren't we all Hopefully my area will have changed from orange to blue!

rob808

chris_ie wrote: »

Aren't we all Hopefully my area will have changed from orange to blue!

R you one of the lucky people getting FTTH how would they do your house if the telephone wire are underground and your house a bit away from the road.

chris_ie

rob808 wrote: »

R you one of the lucky people getting FTTH how would they do your house if the telephone wire are underground and your house a bit away from the road.

Nah I might not be getting it at all. The town near me is on the new list meaning I'd then be 5km away from fiber enabled areas on both sides. So hoping they might connect the houses between these areas. Quite a few houses out our way, along our small stetch of road there are around 10-12 most of which would take up the offer of FTTH I think.

rob808

chris_ie wrote: »

Nah I might not be getting it at all. The town near me is on the new list meaning I'd then be 5km away from fiber enabled areas on both sides. So hoping they might connect the houses between these areas. Quite a few houses out our way, along our small stetch of road there are around 10-12 most of which would take up the offer of FTTH I think.

Well you might be lucky kinda hope in July what our goverment plan is for NBP and it better be a full fibre solution doh think the bidding mainly going be siro vs Eircom which is a good thing for rural people.

KOR101

bk wrote: »

I'm sorry but you couldn't be more wrong about this. The outlook for the telecoms market for the next 50 years is VERY clear.

5G is pure vapourware. Of course 5G will offer improved mobile broadband speeds just as 3G and 4G have. But it won't be a replacement for high quality fixed broadband, just as 3G and 4G aren't.

Wireless broadband is limited by fundamental laws of physics, you can't simply magic more wireless bandwidth out of thin air (pun attended!!). If you want to deliver a large amount of bandwidth over wireless, then the only way is with a very high density of cell sites. But the cost of such density of cell sites is such that it makes it far more expensive then FTTH.

light is literally the fastest thing in the universe!! And fibre is just a beam of light shot down a glass tube. It literally doesn't get better then that.

Yes, the standards of FTTH tecnology will change over time, GPON -> 10GPON -> 40 GPON, etc. But the beauty of FTTH is that once in place, all you have to do is replace the lasers in the exchange and home in order to take advantage of these upgrades. The fiber itself doesn't need to be touched. And as we know it is labour and civics that make up over 70% of the cost. So this makes future upgrades relatively straight forward and cheap.

The reality is whoever has a FTTH network, will dominate the telecoms market for the next 50 to 100 years. That is why everyone is rushing to deploy FTTH networks. They are rushing to lock down long term market monopoly.

That is why Vodafone is investing in fixed wired broadband networks throughout Europe. Investing in or buying up FTTH, FTTC or HFC networks. Even Vodafone know that fixed broadband is the future for telecoms.

When you say the outlook for the Telecoms market for the next 50 years is very clear. You mean that FTTH is the solution for the foreseable long-term. Long-term investment returns in this market are NOT at all clear in my opinion. When Richard Moat talks about Eircom having reached an inflexion point, he's talking about reversing the revenue declines caused by people deciding a mobile phone was a better option than funding a fixed line infrastucture through the line rental fee. BT in the UK is taking on Sky in the TV market, because once you have fibre, that infrastructure should give you a strategic advantage for cheaply providing TV. And then from SIRO's point of view, there really is no need to have two sets of poles and ducts criss-crossing the country. Using the ESB one and cheaply adding fibre makes Eircom a pointless redundancy. This is a market characterised by flux.

So anyway, my point is that there is nothing at all clear about where all these strategic movements lead in terms of rewarding a particular investment. To payback within 13 years (was it even discounted payback) doesn't provide much comfort. Or, put it a better way, would YOU invest in Eircom, or would you consider that a safe bet?

I took a bad example by using 5G to illustrate how things might change, and I think at this point you've won the FTTH argument hands down. All the recent developments support that.

I'd also take issue with the term Telecoms market. Mobile may very well still be the future of that market, but not Internet provision and TV.

rob808

I think Eircom would be worth investing because there think long term and not just asset stripping like the old Eircom of the past.It was a big gamble doing the 300,000 homes with FTTH costing them 400m.I wondering what cost to do the 460,000 homes will cost would it be double like 800m.

dbit

Im in blue and i will be 300 -400 meters from the exchange in Macroom , So what does this mean exactly ? are they saying they will push fiber to the home ?

murphaph

dbit wrote: »

Im in blue and i will be 300 -400 meters from the exchange in Macroom , So what does this mean exactly ? are they saying they will push fiber to the home ?

I'm sure 300m from the exchange means you're more likely (initially at least) to get (e)VDSL which would be enough to make you "blue" at that distance (or is Macroom on either the Eircom or Siro list of FTTH towns?).

dbit

murphaph wrote: »

I'm sure 300m from the exchange means you're more likely (initially at least) to get (e)VDSL which would be enough to make you "blue" at that distance (or is Macroom on either the Eircom or Siro list of FTTH towns?).

Naaa its on neither list of towns , just thought being in the Blue might mean something for me , as suspected it does not maybe in 4 years if im still here it could mean eircom wiould roll ftth , dont see that happening any time soon . Only taking 12 months lease in case i do actually manage to find that log cabin in the woods with FTTH .

ItHurtsWhenIP

dbit wrote: »

Im in blue and i will be 300 -400 meters from the exchange in Macroom , So what does this mean exactly ? are they saying they will push fiber to the home ?

I reckon that means you will get eFibre (eVDSL) by next year (latest) and will just have to damn well like it and go get some lotion!!! :P

I, in amber, will be faffing around on FWA until some kind NBP operator strings some glass rope up to my humble abode ... sometime in the next 6 years!!!

Bill Shock

rob808 wrote: »

Well you might be lucky kinda hope in July what our goverment plan is for NBP and it better be a full fibre solution doh think the bidding mainly going be siro vs Eircom which is a good thing for rural people.

If you read ANYTHING issued by dept or Minister (or past ministers) you will see that there is no way that whatever is published in the summer will set out a fibre solution. They have consistently said that they must observe a technology neutral position in any strategy....to do otherwise would let the like of the WISPs in with a competition complaint. reckon best you can hope for is a high level service specification thereby forcing bidders to demonstrate how they intend to be able to meet that. I also presume that specification will include capacity to accommodate future demand growth....think this is onlyway we can arrive at a fibre solution. EU competition rules will force them to be careful about how they describe what it is they want.

rob808

Bill Shock wrote: »

If you read ANYTHING issued by dept or Minister (or past ministers) you will see that there is no way that whatever is published in the summer will set out a fibre solution. They have consistently said that they must observe a technology neutral position in any strategy....to do otherwise would let the like of the WISPs in with a competition complaint. reckon best you can hope for is a high level service specification thereby forcing bidders to demonstrate how they intend to be able to meet that. I also presume that specification will include capacity to accommodate future demand growth....think this is onlyway we can arrive at a fibre solution. EU competition rules will force them to be careful about how they describe what it is they want.

yea I know what you mean that true but gona have to be base on fibre given the requirement 30mb up and 6mb down can't see wisp being able to do that plus rather Eircom or siro win it after seeing what 3 did last NBP.

dbit

rob808 wrote: »

yea I know what you mean that true but gona have to be base on fibre given the requirement 30mb up and 6mb down can't see wisp being able to do that plus rather Eircom or siro win it after seeing what 3 did last NBP.

Why could a wisp not do that , the gear is there today to push much higher speeds, and at resonable prices for the equip ?

rob808

dbit wrote: »

Why could a wisp not do that , the gear is there today to push much higher speeds, and at resonable proces for the equip ?

yea they probably Could the wisp could win it and it be kinda funny the other 300,000 be enjoying 1gb broadband were as we be on just 30mb.:o

dbit

Well as i understand it all the major Players have gone all out and merged to try to ensure wisps get a good market share if successfull. Dave Mc Donald from Nova networks for example is pushing hard now and i would say he will start to sell ftth soon enough ( Not just in cork regions) . Wisps transmission capabilities if on the latest tiers of equipment can achieve Fiber backhaul performance without too much disruption to current setups , they can still run inline with whats there already only adding gear to satisfy those who want higher speeds. For Granny and Granda on the hillside they really wont give a crap about 3mb versus 30 MB.

Johnboy1951

dbit wrote: »

Well as i understand it all the major Players have gone all out and merged to try to ensure wisps get a good market share if successfull. Dave Mc Donald from Nova networks for example is pushing hard now and i would say he will start to sell ftth soon enough ( Not just in cork regions) . Wisps transmission capabilities if on the latest tiers of equipment can achieve Fiber backhaul perfromance without too much disruption to current setups , they can still run inline with whts there already only adding gear to satisy those who want higher speeds. For Granny and Granda on the hillside they really wont give a crap about 3mb versus 30 MB.

That is one of the more objectionable things I have seen posted here.

dbit

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

That is one of the more objectionable things I have seen posted here.

Object away moname :-) Point im trying to make by it is its more of a delivery expectation than a demand for the most part there is no way in hell Sheila Mc spud and joe Soap and Mary washing powder will pick up the phone and demand the speeds . ( Guessing 40% uptake or demand would come to the top once speeds are made available by whatever medium decided upon.)

rob808

dbit wrote: »

Object away moname :-) Point im trying to make by it is its more of a delivery expectation than a demand for the most part there is no way in hell Sheila Mc spud and joe Soap and Mary washing powder will pick up the phone and demand the speeds . ( Guessing 40% uptake or demand would come to the top once speeds are made available by whatever medium decided upon.)

Yea I'm still hoping for FTTH would rather have that and have upto 1gb broadband than wisp which just deliver 30mb and maybe a little more.The 1gb from Eircom just €45 for ex sample .

KOR101

dbit wrote: »

For Granny and Granda on the hillside they really wont give a crap about 3mb versus 30 MB.

You're right about them not demanding it. Most people on my hill in Kerry rave about how good SCC is, but when I test it, they are only getting about 2mbits. But, the whole point of the plan is to achieve the objective of 30mbit speed and AT peak time, and with clear potential for upping that objective in the future. Spell out technically how WISPs can do that. I'm genuinely interested to hear as a lot of posters here seem so 'one eyed' about fibre.

Johnboy1951

dbit wrote: »

Object away moname :-) Point im trying to make by it is its more of a delivery expectation than a demand for the most part there is no way in hell Sheila Mc spud and joe Soap and Mary washing powder will pick up the phone and demand the speeds . ( Guessing 40% uptake or demand would come to the top once speeds are made available by whatever medium decided upon.)

I did not object to your post.

I pointed out the content that I find objectionable.

I see from this post it is pointless.

Take whatever guesses you like, but the attitude and disrespect shown in those posts does you no service.

dbit

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I did not object to your post.

I pointed out the content that I find objectionable.

I see from this post it is pointless.

Take whatever guesses you like, but the attitude and disrespect shown in those posts does you no service.

What are you on about jesus , disrespect give me a break . Il,l ask your permission next time .