NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

Ultimanemo

9726_9726 wrote: »

Who's Jack?

I'm all right Jack

rodge123

Denis naughton on Facebook.
Gwan Denny Boi!

“Broadband will be more important than electricity

There is nobody in Ireland who believes that any home, regardless of location, should be without electricity. That belief is what drove the politicians of the last century to deliver on rural electrification.

If that decision was determined purely on a cost benefit analysis then today we would have homes in Ireland without this basic human requirement. But could we have seen the developments that we have had in agriculture, particularly in the dairy sector where we are now a global leader, were it not for electricity?

The same decision now needs to be made on rural broadband, but on this occasion the potential to exploit this technology is far greater.

For example someone in Ballymacward in County Galway could work remotely with colleagues sitting at a desk in Singapore or San Francisco. This reduces the need to travel with its climate impact and can bring well educated young families back into rural areas where they have the time to actively contribute to local community groups.

This injection of new blood alone into rural Ireland will be transformative. This is in addition to the potential broadband has to reduce the need to travel to access health care, so older people can remain in their own home and own communities much longer.

But the case for broadband becomes far more important as the uses for this technology develop, as was the case with electricity in the last century.

Within 5 years broadband will become more important than electricity. So why do I say that?

As Minister for Energy, I introduced the first grant aid for solar PV panels for homes, including grants for battery storage. I also committed Ireland at EU level to develop a pricing model to allow homeowners to export electricity onto the grid. Within 5 years, I believe that solar PV panels will become standard on roof tops across Ireland.

Today the technology is available to provide a 7 day weather forecast at farm level and within 5 years we will have very accurate sunlight forecasting for individual homes.

With the development of both of these technologies, within 5 years, external electricity supply for daily home use will be less important but you will need broadband to make it all work. For example, going out the door in the morning you will set a wash & dry for your clothes and just throw them in the machine. That machine will then link via broadband with the weather service to see when is the most opportune time during the day, that there will be enough sunlight to generate the electricity from the solar PV panels on the roof to do the wash and dry for the clothes.

This is just one very practical example of how broadband, in 5 years time, will be far more important than your external electricity supply.

Some will say that this broadband technology can be provided nationwide through the roll out of 5G mobile technology, but that is not the answer.

As Minister for Communications I started the work, the first in Europe, on the roll out of 5G technology across Ireland. As part of this work the Communications Regulator ComReg, published a report last November on the geographic roll out of 5G mobile technology.

This analysis concluded that 99.5% geographic coverage of Ireland, bringing a paltry 30mbps, would cost over €1,860m to build over a 10 year period and would require 5,910 new mast sites (out of which 313 would be in challenging terrain) and 1,252 upgrades to existing masts.

This would provide just 30mbps which is well short of the 150mbps currently proposed under the National Broadband Plan. It is also the case that by the time this network would be built out, speeds of 30mbps would be far short of what would be required by modern Irish homes.

This Government and every member of Dáil Éireann will have a decision to make over the coming weeks, do we let rural Ireland fall into the technological dark ages or do we take the bold decision of our predecessors and provide every home with the basic human necessity that is broadband?”

tototoe

9726_9726 wrote: »

I'm a taxpayer, in a well-served area. I have a huge problem with doing Telecom Eireann again. My opinion, which I am entitled to. I have children who will be paying for this guy's network. I think it is plain wrong.

You are not alone. The cost is nuts and not justifiable.

Ultimanemo

Gary kk wrote: »

I think the bill for Irish water upgrades is 10 billion everyone is paying tax on that even while most houses in rural areas have a well and all have septic tanks. Why can't rural Ireland have decent broadband without people giving out about having to pay tax towards it when or because there is no direct benefit to them.

I pay tax and every now and then I have to buy stuff to fill a pothole in the road going to my house

Ultimanemo

Ultimanemo wrote: »

I pay tax and every now and then I have to buy stuff to fill a pothole in the road going to my house

You are leaving yourself open to being sued by doing so.

The cost being quoted sounds high but the benefits would be worth it in my opinion, and the whole fiasco should be a lesson to anyone pushing for the privatisation of essential services that were created and maintained for decades by the taxpayer.

listermint

DubInMeath wrote: »

You are leaving yourself open to being sued by doing so.

The cost being quoted sounds high but the benefits would be worth it in my opinion, and the whole fiasco should be a lesson to anyone pushing for the privatisation of essential services that were created and maintained for decades by the taxpayer.

Yes and he'd still have a hole in his road.


Everyone can get sued for anything these days.

Surely the whole fiasco is a lesson that we learn now before starting it and handing it all over to private hands.

The network has or be kept in state hands it's too vital.

The high horse brigade

listermint wrote: »

The network has or be kept in state hands it's too vital.

But that's not possible without ripping up this plan and starting from scratch setting us back about 6 or 8 years. We can't wait, we need this rural rollout yesterday.

listermint

listermint wrote: »

Yes and he'd still have a hole in his road.


Everyone can get sued for anything these days.

Surely the whole fiasco is a lesson that we learn now before starting it and handing it all over to private hands.

The network has or be kept in state hands it's too vital.

To late for that unless the government buys back the infrastructure from Eir and if they did so that would cost a lot more than 3bn.

If they did go down that route, people would still be unhappy with them spending the money as long as they either already have fibre or don't personally need it.

Johnboy1951

I believe I heard this am on some radio station I was not really listening to, that if 100K premises were omitted from the remaining NBP premises, that the roll out would cost substantially less.

I believe this was to point out that the cost of the NBP is really being driven by those most remote and difficult to access premises.

I surely hope it was not the first shot in reducing the 100% NBP to something a lot less ..... with perhaps the remaining 100K being serviced by fixed wireless.

On the other hand I might have mis-heard or misunderstood what I did hear.
Anyone else hear something similar?

Pique

I figured the remote outliers would be getting fixed wireless anyway. Not 100k though. More like 5-10% or about 25-50k premises.

The Cush

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

On the other hand I might have mis-heard or misunderstood what I did hear.
Anyone else hear something similar?

Front page of the Sunday Indo today, an astonishing row between the Sec. Gen. of the Dept of Public Expenditure and government over the value for money to roll out fibre broadband to every property in the country. He believes the €3bn price tag cannot be justified. But the government is likely to go ahead with it in any case.

Sources close to the project believe 443,000 homes is relatively cost effective but costs dramatically increase for the remaining 100,000.

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/other/secret-row-over-broadband-cost-varadkar-told-€3bn-cost-is-not-value-for-money/ar-BBWmVKg
https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/rural-life/forgotten-people-of-irelands-black-valley-left-in-the-dark-ages-38057263.html

swedex

rodge123 wrote: »

Denis naughton on Facebook.
Gwan Denny Boi!

“Broadband will be more important than electricity

There is nobody in Ireland who believes that any home, regardless of location, should be without electricity. That belief is what drove the politicians of the last century to deliver on rural electrification.

If that decision was determined purely on a cost benefit analysis then today we would have homes in Ireland without this basic human requirement. But could we have seen the developments that we have had in agriculture, particularly in the dairy sector where we are now a global leader, were it not for electricity?

The same decision now needs to be made on rural broadband, but on this occasion the potential to exploit this technology is far greater.

For example someone in Ballymacward in County Galway could work remotely with colleagues sitting at a desk in Singapore or San Francisco. This reduces the need to travel with its climate impact and can bring well educated young families back into rural areas where they have the time to actively contribute to local community groups.

This injection of new blood alone into rural Ireland will be transformative. This is in addition to the potential broadband has to reduce the need to travel to access health care, so older people can remain in their own home and own communities much longer.

But the case for broadband becomes far more important as the uses for this technology develop, as was the case with electricity in the last century.

Within 5 years broadband will become more important than electricity. So why do I say that?

As Minister for Energy, I introduced the first grant aid for solar PV panels for homes, including grants for battery storage. I also committed Ireland at EU level to develop a pricing model to allow homeowners to export electricity onto the grid. Within 5 years, I believe that solar PV panels will become standard on roof tops across Ireland.

Today the technology is available to provide a 7 day weather forecast at farm level and within 5 years we will have very accurate sunlight forecasting for individual homes.

With the development of both of these technologies, within 5 years, external electricity supply for daily home use will be less important but you will need broadband to make it all work. For example, going out the door in the morning you will set a wash & dry for your clothes and just throw them in the machine. That machine will then link via broadband with the weather service to see when is the most opportune time during the day, that there will be enough sunlight to generate the electricity from the solar PV panels on the roof to do the wash and dry for the clothes.

This is just one very practical example of how broadband, in 5 years time, will be far more important than your external electricity supply.

Some will say that this broadband technology can be provided nationwide through the roll out of 5G mobile technology, but that is not the answer.

As Minister for Communications I started the work, the first in Europe, on the roll out of 5G technology across Ireland. As part of this work the Communications Regulator ComReg, published a report last November on the geographic roll out of 5G mobile technology.

This analysis concluded that 99.5% geographic coverage of Ireland, bringing a paltry 30mbps, would cost over €1,860m to build over a 10 year period and would require 5,910 new mast sites (out of which 313 would be in challenging terrain) and 1,252 upgrades to existing masts.

This would provide just 30mbps which is well short of the 150mbps currently proposed under the National Broadband Plan. It is also the case that by the time this network would be built out, speeds of 30mbps would be far short of what would be required by modern Irish homes.

This Government and every member of Dáil Éireann will have a decision to make over the coming weeks, do we let rural Ireland fall into the technological dark ages or do we take the bold decision of our predecessors and provide every home with the basic human necessity that is broadband?”

This is nuts, the ESB have as much interest in microgeneration as they have in rolling out rural FTTH and as a former minister he should be acutely aware of that.

Xavier Niel bought 66% of Eir for 3.5 billion and we are going to spend 3 billion on a network we won't own...madness!

Orebro

listermint wrote: »

With respect it doesn't

You said most of the people in here are urban and have fibre. That's clearly waffle.

All I see here is someone who claims to live in a rural area without broadband, needs broadband for work, and doesn't want to see the NBP to go ahead in its current guise (therefore safe to assume is happy to wait another 7/8 years for it at a minimum). You're not credible so I call BS. There's only one waffler in this conversation and it ain't me!

listermint

Orebro wrote: »

All I see here is someone who claims to live in a rural area without broadband, needs broadband for work, and doesn't want to see the NBP to go ahead in its current guise (therefore safe to assume is happy to wait another 7/8 years for it at a minimum). You're not credible so I call BS. There's only one waffler in this conversation and it ain't me!

I'm on imagine.

I live in rural Wicklow.

I prefer value for money. Because I know we will pay dearly for this in the short and long term.

Anything else you wish to know

The Cush

The Cush wrote: »

Front page of the Sunday Indo today, an astonishing row between the Sec. Gen. of the Dept of Public Expenditure and government over the value for money to roll out fibre broadband to every property in the country. He believes the €3bn price tag cannot be justified. But the government is likely to go ahead with it in any case.

Sources close to the project believe 443,000 homes is relatively cost effective but costs dramatically increase for the remaining 100,000.

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/other/secret-row-over-broadband-cost-varadkar-told-€3bn-cost-is-not-value-for-money/ar-BBWmVKg
https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/rural-life/forgotten-people-of-irelands-black-valley-left-in-the-dark-ages-38057263.html

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2019/0428/1046170-martin-arbour-hill/

Separately, Mr Martin said that it is time for full transparency from the Government in relation to the National Broadband Plan.

Mr Martin was commenting on a report in today's Sunday Independent that the Secretary General of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, Robert Watt, has told the Taoiseach Leo Varadkar and Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe that they should abandon plans to bring high-speed broadband to almost every home and business in the country based on the €3bn cost.

He said that Barry Cowen wrote last week to the Minister For Public Expenditure Paschal Donohoe asking him to publish all advice within his Department in relation to the National Broadband Plan and its expenditure.

'It's heading towards being the most expensive broadband plan in the world at €3bn," Mr Martin said.

"I've already raised questions publicly with the Taoiseach if the consortium has the capacity to deliver the plan. Who will own the asset at the end of the 25 years?

"It's been a botched procurement exercise. I think it would have been far better if they had asked a State agency like the ESB to have got on with it a long time ago," he added.

Johnboy1951

In addition to the cost of this contract and the concerns about ownership after the 25 years, there is also an important item that seems to receive little emphasis.

Is the bidder capable of doing this roll out and in what time frame to complete it?

A lot of those who should know seem to believe it will not be done in less than 5 years.
Making an assumption that the 'easier access' parts were to be done first, is there any value in the idea that the 100k premises (mentioned by Mr. Watt) could be omitted from the initial stage of the contract, and done as a Stage II?

This would get the majority done with FTTH a.s.a.p. and at a much reduced cost.

It would then open up the Stage II decision for separate negotiations and might even alter what is deemed necessary ....... after all 5 years is a long time in the life of internet technology!

Heck maybe even the likes of Imagine fixed wireless could be used for those 'difficult' premises, after all fibre will already be very close to ensure sufficient backhaul, and more companies with better service might have entered, or be prepared to enter, the Irish market for Stage II.

Either way I continue to believe that ownership of the roll out should be in state hands and not some commercial entity who can do as they wish with it.

digiman

Let's just get it done now and spend the 3B on it, it will only be in years to come that the government will be thanked for it and that their vision of fibre to every home was the correct one. For now just ignore all the people who don't have a vision that we can be world leading in something and not always settling for 2nd or 3rd best all the time. Let's aim for best for a change and leave a lasting infrastucture that our children and children's children will be proud of.

FWIW I live in urban Ireland but grew up in rural and already have a 1Gb/s connection and also pay lots of tax for lots of things I get no use out of but a selfish attitude won't get us anywhere.

The Cush

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

In addition to the cost of this contract and the concerns about ownership after the 25 years, there is also an important item that seems to receive little emphasis.

Is the bidder capable of doing this roll out and in what time frame to complete it?

An issue raised by Timmy Dooley on Clare FM last Friday - http://www.clare.fm/news/infrastructure/claims-national-broadband-plan-failed-every-respect/

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Heck maybe even the likes of Imagine fixed wireless could be used for those 'difficult' premises, after all fibre will already be very close to ensure sufficient backhaul, and more companies with better service might have entered, or be prepared to enter, the Irish market for Stage II.

From the Indo article

It is expected some of the more difficult homes to reach will be fitted with domestic broadband receivers which can connect to local transmitter outposts.

"You could have a transmitter on a gatepost on the side of the road and the fibre optic cable running into the transmitter and two miles across the field, you have a receiver in the house getting the broadband," a source said.

How will this work in relation to the subsidy?
NBI doesn't have any spectrum to do wireless, will this be sub-contracted out to the 3.6 GHz spectrum rights holders?

Johnboy1951

It is expected some of the more difficult homes to reach will be fitted with domestic broadband receivers which can connect to local transmitter outposts.

"You could have a transmitter on a gatepost on the side of the road and the fibre optic cable running into the transmitter and two miles across the field, you have a receiver in the house getting the broadband," a source said.

That one rally has me stumped

If you could bring the fibre as far as the transmitter for two miles across a field then why not into the house?

The Cush

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

That one rally has me stumped

If you could bring the fibre as far as the transmitter for two miles across a field then why not into the house?

A 3.6 GHz cell is approx 20km radius, so I'd guess they're looking at something like that to cover some of the more remote properties instead of running fibre to everyone of those premises.

Johnboy1951

The Cush wrote: »

A 3.6 GHz cell is approx 20km radius, so I'd guess they're looking at something like that to cover some of the more remote properties instead of running fibre to everyone of those premises.

Unfortunately I am not getting the logic ...... these are premises that are well scattered across the countryside, so something on a gatepost will serve one premise most likely.

I must be missing something, because I cannot see the logic at all.

The high horse brigade

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Unfortunately I am not getting the logic ...... these are premises that are well scattered across the countryside, so something on a gatepost will serve one premise most likely.

I must be missing something, because I cannot see the logic at all.

Wireless receiver on gatepost, gatepost 2 miles from house. Gatepost up to 20km from transmitter is what I think they meant

Johnboy1951

The high horse brigade wrote: »

Wireless receiver on gatepost, gatepost 2 miles from house. Gatepost up to 20km from transmitter is what I think they meant

Ah ........ but surely if that were the case the receiver could be at the house?

gnf_ireland

digiman wrote: »

Let's just get it done now and spend the 3B on it, it will only be in years to come that the government will be thanked for it and that their vision of fibre to every home was the correct one. For now just ignore all the people who don't have a vision that we can be world leading in something and not always settling for 2nd or 3rd best all the time. Let's aim for best for a change and leave a lasting infrastucture that our children and children's children will be proud of.

FWIW I live in urban Ireland but grew up in rural and already have a 1Gb/s connection and also pay lots of tax for lots of things I get no use out of but a selfish attitude won't get us anywhere.

I am in the same boat as @digiman from rural Ireland but now live in an urban area with fibre broadband. I fully agree with the comments made above - sometimes we need to consider the bigger picture.

I can point at a handful of times I can say our government has been visionary - free second level education from Donagh O'Malley being one. This changed the course of Ireland forever, and turned us into a pretty educated nation in general for the time. Taxing on plastic bags and the smoking ban are two others I think were also visionary.

I think NBP can have the same benefits in the medium term as free second level education. To truly enable a connected country opens up so much opportunity for innovation and economic growth and allows us, as a nation, to continue to be leaders in the technology field. It is a clear statement of intent on our digital ambitions and we hopefully can follow it up with other initiatives to maximise the benefit.

For the urbanites here, our cities are choking - not just Dublin, but Cork, Limerick and Galway also. We need to find a way to reverse the mass migration to the urban centres before they collapse. We need to find ways to reduce our carbon footprint - less time in traffic can only be of benefit here.

I think in 5-10 years, we will really see the benefits of NBP. Its hard to see beyond Netflix at the moment, but those working on the cutting edge of IT probably have a better idea of the possibilities it opens up. I want my children to have options, and I do think NBP offers options to all our citizens - that may somewhat offset all the debt we have loaded onto them !

Johnboy1951

gnf_ireland wrote: »

I am in the same boat as @digiman from rural Ireland but now live in an urban area with fibre broadband. I fully agree with the comments made above - sometimes we need to consider the bigger picture.

I can point at a handful of times I can say our government has been visionary - free second level education from Donagh O'Malley being one. This changed the course of Ireland forever, and turned us into a pretty educated nation in general for the time. Taxing on plastic bags and the smoking ban are two others I think were also visionary.

I think NBP can have the same benefits in the medium term as free second level education. To truly enable a connected country opens up so much opportunity for innovation and economic growth and allows us, as a nation, to continue to be leaders in the technology field. It is a clear statement of intent on our digital ambitions and we hopefully can follow it up with other initiatives to maximise the benefit.

For the urbanites here, our cities are choking - not just Dublin, but Cork, Limerick and Galway also. We need to find a way to reverse the mass migration to the urban centres before they collapse. We need to find ways to reduce our carbon footprint - less time in traffic can only be of benefit here.

I think in 5-10 years, we will really see the benefits of NBP. Its hard to see beyond Netflix at the moment, but those working on the cutting edge of IT probably have a better idea of the possibilities it opens up. I want my children to have options, and I do think NBP offers options to all our citizens - that may somewhat offset all the debt we have loaded onto them !

I doubt anyone is disputing the benefits a successful NBP will bring.

There is a requirement to get value for money when spending public money.

The question remains open whether this scheme is value for money or not, especially considering it will not be completed in ~5 years, and even when it is, having cost the state €3 bn it will be owned by a private company and not the state.

That is where the problem lies.

Ultimanemo

The Cush wrote: »

Front page of the Sunday Indo today, an astonishing row between the Sec. Gen. of the Dept of Public Expenditure and government over the value for money to roll out fibre broadband to every property in the country. He believes the €3bn price tag cannot be justified. But the government is likely to go ahead with it in any case.

Sources close to the project believe 443,000 homes is relatively cost effective but costs dramatically increase for the remaining 100,000.

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/other/secret-row-over-broadband-cost-varadkar-told-€3bn-cost-is-not-value-for-money/ar-BBWmVKg
https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/rural-life/forgotten-people-of-irelands-black-valley-left-in-the-dark-ages-38057263.html

I put: Robert Watt in Google, he says other strange things as well

gnf_ireland

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

There is a requirement to get value for money when spending public money.

The question remains open whether this scheme is value for money or not, especially considering it will not be completed in ~5 years, and even when it is, having cost the state €3 bn it will be owned by a private company and not the state.

That is where the problem lies.

I think the fundamental issue here is the government grossly underestimated the cost of the project in the first instance and have ended up in this position as a result. I understand the number quoted includes VAT, so straight away is 20% mark-up !

I don't see a number of companies queuing up to say they will do it, even with the number quoted as it is. Personally I think there is a level of risk of how successful this is, and larger companies are not willing to take on that risk as it could bring down their existing business if it goes wrong. I have seen this so often in business, where large companies tend to form partnerships for new ventures rather than risk brand and reputation on a risky project.

I genuinely think the risk profile of the project should not be under estimated. If it was easy money, I am sure eir and SIRO (or ESB) would happily give indications to the media they are interested. This has not be forth coming - in fact it has been the opposite !

I heard that the department have spent millions on reports from international consulting firms going through the elements of the proposal. I am sure these will be released in due course, and will no doubt make interesting reading. I am sure the minister and cabinet will have all i's dotted and t's crossed given the level of discussion on this one post children's hospital.

The ownership issue was listed at the start of the process and has not changed since. 25 years is a long time, especially in technology. That said, I would love to know what the projected asset value is at that time, with aging poles on 25 year old fibre and legacy IT systems. The residual value will be based on customer uptake and whether it can be run/operated as a going concern without further state subsidy at that stage.
Looking at storm Hannah at the weekend - 32k homes without power - a few good storms like that will no doubt seriously influence the asset value !

Can we not use some of that Apple tax money to give something meaningful to the country :-)

digiman

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I doubt anyone is disputing the benefits a successful NBP will bring.

There is a requirement to get value for money when spending public money.

The question remains open whether this scheme is value for money or not, especially considering it will not be completed in ~5 years, and even when it is, having cost the state €3 bn it will be owned by a private company and not the state.

That is where the problem lies.

When there are no other viable options on the table what else can you do. The opportunity cost here by delaying and waiting on some better offer that may never come will in all likely hood cost us more in the long run. Do it now when we have the budget and finances, waiting another few years could give us a cheaper project cost but that may be no use if the country is entering a recession and the funds are no longer there.

Of course Eir could do this cheaper than the offer that is on the table but they are not willing to do it as they have something else that will give them a greater roi in a shorter time frame with less risk and they are not exactly swimming with spare cash to take this on either. Talking about their urban fibre program.

Also don't forget that they will also make a lot of money by not having to do anything that will generate them long term revenue by maintaing poles that would have cost them a fortune to maintain otherwise and renting spare dark fibre that they will do very well out of this without doing very much.

This is a long term strategic project for the country and a private firm is not going to do this for nothing as it is a high risk project with uncertain take up. You can be sure that it will eventually be very high take up but nobody knows exactly when that will be. I've been there trying to predict it and its just a bunch of educated experienced people going with different assumptions where everyone's guess is as good as each other at this point and can vary wildly. And you end up going with something in between all guesses. But the estimated return and at what year it does return will vary by tens of millions and could be enough to send a company to the wall.

The only thing that I would suggest we do different at this stage would be to go with xgspon rather than gpon. The price difference in equipment will be very small in comparison to the overall project cost. Will probably cost in the region of 10-20mill extra to roll out an xgspon network now verus a gpon network and that's nothing in comparison to 3B.

listermint

The same people cheering this on at all costs right now in this thread.

Will be the very same individuals in after hours in ten years bitching about fine Gael giving away free infrastructure. When we are paying through the nose to a monopolised network with a single provider running it.

tsue921i8wljb3

I expect it will be XGS-PON and there is no guarantee that they will use existing open eir dark fibre.

digiman

listermint wrote: »

The same people cheering this on at all costs right now in this thread.

Will be the very same individuals in after hours in ten years bitching about fine Gael giving away free infrastructure. When we are paying through the nose to a monopolised network with a single provider running it.

There is nothing wrong with changing your mind on a matter when better information comes along in the future but right now this is the best offer we have.

In fact some very smart and successful individual's regard this as a high form of intelligence. Nothing worse than people sticking to the same opinion and conclusion out of stobourness and pride to admit they were wrong.

Sure it would be better if the state owned it at the end of it all but it was deemed several years ago that unless there was a decent carrot at the end of it all that you wouldn't attract the right type of bidders and you will more than likely maintain/upgrade/invest in something much better if you know you will own it at the end.

The Cush

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Ah ........ but surely if that were the case the receiver could be at the house?

The difficult to reach premises will be supplied by FWA of some sort, we don't know exactly what solution NBI have proposed in their tender submission but assumption might be the 3.6 GHz spectrum, rights holders such as eir, Vodafone, Three and even Imagine. There is another company Airspan/Dense Air with a chunk of that spectrum also. Maybe some of the new spectrum would come into play, the 2.6 GHz and 2.3 GHz bands.

FWA antenna on the gable end pointing at a mast somewhere.

The Cush

Even if Grantham McCourt are awarded the contract, god only knows who'll own NBI in 25 years time.

tsue921i8wljb3

The Cush wrote: »

The difficult to reach premises will be supplied by FWA of some sort, we don't know exactly what solution NBI have proposed in their tender submission but assumption might be the 3.6 GHz spectrum, rights holders such as eir, Vodafone, Three and even Imagine. There is another company Airspan/Dense Air with a chunk of that spectrum also. Maybe some of the new spectrum would come into play, the 2.6 GHz and 2.3 GHz bands.

FWA antenna on the gable end pointing at a mast somewhere.

enet own Airspeed, a wireless provider that focus primarily on business at the minute. They have some licensed 10.5 GHz spectrum. There may also be the possibility of unlicensed PtP links. I suppose it depends on the density of the homes that can't be reached by fibre.

The Cush

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

enet own Airspeed, a wireless provider that focus primarily on business at the minute. They have some licensed 10.5 GHz spectrum. There may also be the possibility of unlicensed PtP links. I suppose it depends on the density of the homes that can't be reached by fibre.

I wonder if that level of detail will be made public if the contract is awarded in a week or so?

The closer we get to a decision the more of this we'll see I guess, Calls mount to scrap €3bn National Broadband Plan

tsue921i8wljb3

The Cush wrote: »

I wonder if that level of detail will be made public if the contract is awarded in a week or so?

The closer we get to a decision the more of this we'll see I guess, Calls mount to scrap €3bn National Broadband Plan

I don't know but would not be surprised if that level of detail isn't released.

Johnboy1951

The majority of the present concerns are around the cost, with the time scale coming close behind.

It would be very comforting to get an indication from some other company what they reckon the roll out would cost.
Even if it was a little lower than the 3 bn bandied about it would give us all some assurance we were not being 'taken for a ride'.

gnf_ireland ..... referred to VAT being included in this cost.
If that is the case I am very surprised, as I would expect a figure from gov to not include it.

If it is then that drops the cost to ~€2.5 bn

I would ask gnf_ireland why he believes the gov figure includes vat in this instance?

tsue921i8wljb3

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

The majority of the present concerns are around the cost, with the time scale coming close behind.

It would be very comforting to get an indication from some other company what they reckon the roll out would cost.
Even if it was a little lower than the 3 bn bandied about it would give us all some assurance we were not being 'taken for a ride'.

gnf_ireland ..... referred to VAT being included in this cost.
If that is the case I am very surprised, as I would expect a figure from gov to not include it.

If it is then that drops the cost to ~€2.5 bn

I would ask gnf_ireland why he believes the gov figure includes vat in this instance?

Really only the two other entities involved in the tendering could give opinions on costs. SIRO refused to appear before the PAC and seem to have no desire to speak about the NBP whatsoever. eir through their CEO said that at least a certain amount of the intervention premises could have been passed by them at a lesser cost outside of the onerous conditions mandated by the NBP process.

The Cush

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

gnf_ireland ..... referred to VAT being included in this cost.
If that is the case I am very surprised, as I would expect a figure from gov to not include it.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2019-04-16/2/

Taoiseach: … The Government needs to spend a little more time before we can bring a decision on this to Cabinet. As the Deputy knows, the cost, including VAT, contingencies and so on could be in the region of €3 billion, albeit spread over 25 years.

Johnboy1951

OK, he did specify the VAT ..... had not absorbed that. Thanks.

I wonder now how loose 'in the region of' will turn out to be.

It does seem there is no alternative but to accept that the gov have a good indication of what others would charge for this and the ~€3 bn is not too far out.

That does not sit well with me though as I have a great distrust of what politicians tell me.

The Cush

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

It does seem there is no alternative but to accept that the gov have a good indication of what others would charge for this and the ~€3 bn is not too far out.

Bids came in at similar cost

The Taoiseach: … In terms of bids, the only bid received is not only from Granahan McCourt. Before others withdrew, they also put in bids and the figures were similar in those bids.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2019-04-17/17/

The Taoiseach: I thank the Deputy for the question. As I have always said about this and other projects, small and large, one only really knows what the true cost will be when the bids and tenders come in. When it comes to this project, there were three bids.

Deputy Brendan Howlin: We do not have three bids.

The Taoiseach: While it is true that two of those three bidders have since withdrawn, we have three bids and we know what the cost is of the project. All three bids came in at a similar figure.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2019-04-16/2/

Johnboy1951

..... and no details of course can be released.
If all three bids were around €3 bn when they arrived (for near enough exactly the same thing), why the silence for such a long time about the cost?
We had people still thinking the cost was €0.5 bn for quite a long time until the €3 bn figure was 'leaked'.

I did say I have a large distrust of what politicians say ........ and probably will have until my end.

gnf_ireland

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

It does seem there is no alternative but to accept that the gov have a good indication of what others would charge for this and the ~€3 bn is not too far out.

That does not sit well with me though as I have a great distrust of what politicians tell me.

I understand your great distrust and I am sure many more are of the same view. However, I understand this process has been run with the expectation of a tribunal at the end (dept burned previously over second mobile licence) and I am sure all the material will be made available at the appropriate time - either via freedom of information or a tribunal process.

The harsh reality is the government are between a rock and a hard place on this. Either they wish to invest in rural Ireland or they don't. If they don't spend the money here, within 10 years rural Ireland will be completely dead and even agriculture will struggle as more automation comes to the fore.

As I said before, if it was that lucrative a contract, where is the queue of bidders lining up to get rich quick !

turbbo

gnf_ireland wrote: »

I understand your great distrust and I am sure many more are of the same view. However, I understand this process has been run with the expectation of a tribunal at the end (dept burned previously over second mobile licence) and I am sure all the material will be made available at the appropriate time - either via freedom of information or a tribunal process.

The harsh reality is the government are between a rock and a hard place on this. Either they wish to invest in rural Ireland or they don't. If they don't spend the money here, within 10 years rural Ireland will be completely dead and even agriculture will struggle as more automation comes to the fore.

As I said before, if it was that lucrative a contract, where is the queue of bidders lining up to get rich quick !

Not sure the state owning the infrastructure would save us a penny in the long run. It's a nice idea in our heads but the way the state does anything - makes me think the 3 billion will be the cheapest option - just hand it right over as quickly as possible and stop listening to liars in politics moaning about it on the media hourly.

Orebro

While the sale of Eircom and the handing over of the infrastructure was one of the worst decisions ever, I'm failing to see why there is such a big deal about the ownership of this. There is a big difference between owning all the poles etc, and owning the cable that is put onto rented poles from Eir in the case of the NBP - all that is owned here really is the fibre cable itself - all the valuable infrastructure is already owned by Eir.

gnf_ireland

Orebro wrote: »

While the sale of Eircom and the handing over of the infrastructure was one of the worst decisions ever, I'm failing to see why there is such a big deal about the ownership of this. There is a big difference between owning all the poles etc, and owning the cable that is put onto rented poles from Eir in the case of the NBP - all that is owned here really is the fibre cable itself - all the valuable infrastructure is already owned by Eir.

Correct. I also wonder what the lifespan of a timber pole on the western seaboard is? I assume fibre has a 30-40 year lifespan, but don't know the detail.

If, as a nation, we are genuinely interested in owning the infrastructure, up the budget to 5bn plus - buy openeir off NJJ and then roll out NBP from there. This is the only true way to own the telecoms infrastructure within the state. However, the time to have done this is probably 2012 when eir was in examinership !!

listermint

Orebro wrote: »

While the sale of Eircom and the handing over of the infrastructure was one of the worst decisions ever, I'm failing to see why there is such a big deal about the ownership of this. There is a big difference between owning all the poles etc, and owning the cable that is put onto rented poles from Eir in the case of the NBP - all that is owned here really is the fibre cable itself - all the valuable infrastructure is already owned by Eir.

There is a huge difference in competition yes. Unless you have manged to tie in fixed rental of the lines. Otherwise a single player could wrap up the market and charge what they like.

We will never know.

and FOI has been trashed as we have seen this year. not worth the paper its written on.

Orebro

listermint wrote: »

There is a huge difference in competition yes. Unless you have manged to tie in fixed rental of the lines. Otherwise a single player could wrap up the market and charge what they like.

We will never know.

and FOI has been trashed as we have seen this year. not worth the paper its written on.

The regulators take care of price gouging, nobody is allowed to charge what they like. And anyway, isn’t the 300k rollout done solely by Eir - doesn’t anyone have concerns that they’ll charge what they want?

Johnboy1951

Orebro wrote: »

The regulators take care of price gouging, nobody is allowed to charge what they like. And anyway, isn’t the 300k rollout done solely by Eir - doesn’t anyone have concerns that they’ll charge what they want?

Not when there is sufficient competition in the market. Even then their charges are high.
Otherwise most definitely yes!

ED E

Orebro wrote: »

The regulators take care of price gouging, nobody is allowed to charge what they like. And anyway, isn’t the 300k rollout done solely by Eir - doesn’t anyone have concerns that they’ll charge what they want?

They're the SMP so are price regulated by Comreg. SIRO or Virgin are the ones that can charge whatever they want and within reason people will still pay it.