NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

The Cush

https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/rteradiowebpage.html#!rii=b9_21548772_48_02-05-2019_

Paschal Donohoe, Minister for Finance, on RTÉ's Morning Ireland. Discussion included the NBP, "I believe the tendering process that we have now, we have to bring to conclusion"

Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe has promised to keep a tight rein on costs when it comes to delivering the National Broadband Plan, insisting there would be no repeat of national children’s hospital debacle.

He said the plan to bring high-speed broadband to 540,000 households across the country, now seven years in the planning, would be delivered on “the basis of the tendered cost”.

His comments come after it emerged the Government plans to approve the project despite the advice of some senior officials who cautioned that the € 3 billion programme did not represent good value for money.

Mr Donohoe acknowledged that mistakes were made in relation to the procurement of the national children’s hospital and that lessons have been learnt.

“In other words, that which we could have done better, in relation to the national children’s hospital and I have acknowledged what that is, we are now looking to do in relation to the National Broadband Plan,” he told RTE’s Morning Ireland radio programme.

However, the broadband process predates the hospital one and with only one bidder left in what was supposed to be a competitive tender process, the Government’s bargaining power is severely hamstrung.

Mr Donohoe said the Government would consider all of the advice before making a final decision on the plan. The cost of the project was originally estimated at up to €1 billion with the Government stumping up half. This has now been revised to €3 billion, however.

“The reason for the difference in cost is because we are now looking to cover more people, ensure more schools, more businesses. more farms have access to public services and their ability to participate and create more employment,” Mr Donohoe said.

“When Government makes a decision in relation to this what we will be doing is making a decision on number one, the basis of the tendered cost, and number two on the basis of going through the contingencies, the risks and the complexities and looking at what the potential cost of that could be in the future,” he said.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/donohoe-insists-broadband-won-t-go-way-of-national-children-s-hospital-1.3878592

Johnboy1951

https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/rteradiowebpage.html#!rii=b9_21548772_48_02-05-2019_

Geeze that page demanded Flash player be installed!

What a load of crock!

Indications are good, if not settled, that the NBP will go ahead, now that the public have been exposed for a sufficient time to the total cost, so the protestations have reduced somewhat.

Bring it on!

It is FTTH an any cost and welcomed.

turbbo

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/rteradiowebpage.html#!rii=b9_21548772_48_02-05-2019_

Geeze that page demanded Flash player be installed!

What a load of crock!

Indications are good, if not settled, that the NBP will go ahead, now that the public have been exposed for a sufficient time to the total cost, so the protestations have reduced somewhat.

Bring it on!

It is FTTH an any cost and welcomed.

Common sense prevails wow! - unusual in politics nowadays.

tototoe

Orebro wrote: »

Besides the farmers, these protesters were a small bunch of nut jobs intent on disrupting a meeting - I doubt the Gov are losing any sleep over it.

Now if they cancel the NBP, they're going to have a very large bunch of nut jobs protesting, with me being one of them

There is a lot of people not happy with €3 billion being quoted for this. It is mental, regardless of how many people want broadband. I was out canvassing for a local independent candidate recently in a relatively rural area and a lot of people are livid about this plan and the cost of it.....alongside the NCH. More people than were in support of it tbh. Its absolutely bonkers to spend 6000 a house to get people broadband....and the motivation for it now seems to be to fulfill a political promise, before elections. And even worse giving it to a bid, that has never been involved in domestic installations, or even the rollout of a telecoms network. That does not bode well.

FG are also currently getting a taste for the depth of feeling around their "government" outside their own bubble (and outside Dublin) and rightly so. Leo and co will likely meet more protestors today in Limerick.

turbbo

tototoe wrote: »

There is a lot of people not happy with €3 billion being quoted for this. It is mental, regardless of how many people want broadband. I was out canvassing for a local independent candidate recently in a relatively rural area and a lot of people are livid about this plan and the cost of it.....alongside the NCH. More people than were in support of it tbh. Its absolutely bonkers to spend 6000 a house to get people broadband....and the motivation for it now seems to be to fulfill a political promise, before elections. And even worse giving it to a bid, that has never been involved in domestic installations, or even the rollout of a telecoms network. That does not bode well.

FG are also currently getting a taste for the depth of feeling around their "government" outside their own bubble (and outside Dublin) and rightly so. Leo and co will likely meet more protestors today in Limerick.

Yeah Leo is to blame alright himself and his Kylie obsession. Can't imagine a lot of those people you canvassed gave 2 $hits about broadband, more interested in collecting welfare. But screw the people that work and pay tax and don't get the option to wfh. Oh I know what party you're in.

tototoe

turbbo wrote: »

Yeah Leo is to blame alright himself and his Kylie obsession. Can't imagine a lot of those people you canvassed gave 2 $hits about broadband, more interested in collecting welfare. But screw the people that work and pay tax and don't get the option to wfh. Oh I know what party you're in.

Never mentioned kylie, because its not in anyway relevant....and the welfare comment renders the rest of your post null and void. Its a fairly well to do area actually, but you keep spouting that type of tripe if you like . FG supporters have been trotting that nonsense out for a while, it doesnt work. Im surprised you didnt try the shinner route.

Any tax payer with a bit of sense can see the value in their taxes, and not see 3billion blown on running ftth to every house as good value, or for that matter 2 billion on one of the most expensive hospitals in the world.

turbbo

tototoe wrote: »

Never mentioned kylie, because its not in anyway relevant....

I was being sarcastic - you know that thing called humour??

tototoe wrote: »

and the welfare comment renders the rest of your post null and void. Its a fairly well to do area actually, but you keep spouting that type of tripe if you like . FG supporters have been trotting that nonsense out for a while, it doesnt work. Im surprised you didnt try the shinner route.

I think we waste most of our tax on all the politicians. No interest in any of them.

tototoe wrote: »

Any tax payer with a bit of sense can see the value in their taxes, and not see 3billion blown on running ftth to every house as good value, or for that matter 2 billion on one of the most expensive hospitals in the world.

NCH aside - I think the 3 billion will be an investment in the country - because the people in rural areas will benefit.

The Cush

tototoe wrote: »

Leo and co will likely meet more protestors today in Limerick.

I'll be the one shouting “Where’s the beef NBP, ye vegan?”

The Cush

Adrian Weckler in the Indo - Government 'committed' to state-subsidised National Broadband Plan... because 'there is no alternative' - minister

The government is “committed” to a state-subsidised National Broadband Plan because there is no alternative for 25pc of the population, Communications Minister Richard Bruton said today.

Speaking in Dublin at the Small Firms Conference, Mr Bruton hinted that the government is ready to proceed next week with the €3bn National Broadband Plan (NBP) project, which aims to connect 540,000 rural homes and businesses with fibre-grade broadband.

He also said that the government favours construction of a rural network on existing private infrastructure rather than building a complete new “isolated” network.

“We've developed this [NBP] proposal on the basis of subsidising the private sector to reach areas that need to be reached,” said Mr Bruton.

“When the private sector has built an existing networks of poles and ducts, it is absolutely logical that the state should seek to build on that rather than have, in its own ownership, isolated ports and wires at the end of a network that is otherwise in private hands.”

Mr Bruton is expected to bring the NBP proposal to Cabinet next Tuesday to seek approval for it. Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has indicated that he supports the plan.

https://twitter.com/SFA_Irl/status/1123887096995954688

theguzman

€3 billion is small money, what is big money is the €20 to €30 billion dumped into the blackhole of the HSE and Social Welfare Budget Annually. I don't care if they spend €10bn on it they will have kept their promise and roll it out as Fibre and ensure that no Wireless charlatans or 5G scamsters get anywhere near it.

I won't be voting for Fine Gael ever again unless we have concrete proof that the NBP is coming (pre-election) and that it is fibreoptic only

Orebro

tototoe wrote: »

Never mentioned kylie, because its not in anyway relevant....and the welfare comment renders the rest of your post null and void. Its a fairly well to do area actually, but you keep spouting that type of tripe if you like . FG supporters have been trotting that nonsense out for a while, it doesnt work. Im surprised you didnt try the shinner route.

Any tax payer with a bit of sense can see the value in their taxes, and not see 3billion blown on running ftth to every house as good value, or for that matter 2 billion on one of the most expensive hospitals in the world.

Out canvassing in a rural "well to do area", with no fixed line broadband, and they're telling you to feck off we don't want it? Pull the other one.

Orebro

theguzman wrote: »

€3 billion is small money, what is big money is the €20 to €30 billion dumped into the blackhole of the HSE and Social Welfare Budget Annually. I don't care if they spend €10bn on it they will have kept their promise and roll it out as Fibre and ensure that no Wireless charlatans or 5G scamsters get anywhere near it.

I won't be voting for Fine Gael ever again unless we have concrete proof that the NBP is coming (pre-election) and that it is fibreoptic only

Lets not forget it's €3Bn over TWENTY FIVE YEARS, with no major initial outlay. This is in no way like the NCH, totally unfair to compare them.

This will be looked back in time the same as rural electrification is now. There'll always be people like tototoe naysayers, like I'm sure there were when rural electrification was being rolled out. The shortsightedness of not seeing the benefits of the NBP is breath taking.

The high horse brigade

€3Billion over 25 years is €120million a year, ~pennies

ED E

In justifying it you're also condemning NBPers to a long long wait.

This project should be 10-15yrs, not 25. In a decade the ISP landscape may have drastically changed.

Ultimanemo

theguzman wrote: »

€3 billion is small money, what is big money is the €20 to €30 billion dumped into the blackhole of the HSE and Social Welfare Budget Annually. I don't care if they spend €10bn on it they will have kept their promise and roll it out as Fibre and ensure that no Wireless charlatans or 5G scamsters get anywhere near it.

I won't be voting for Fine Gael ever again unless we have concrete proof that the NBP is coming (pre-election) and that it is fibreoptic only

Me too

tototoe

Orebro wrote: »

Out canvassing in a rural "well to do area", with no fixed line broadband, and they're telling you to feck off we don't want it? Pull the other one.

And where did I say there was no fixed broadband in the area? Where did I say what was available there at all.

I understand people want broadband, but not at any cost and certainly 3vn under the terms they are talking about....but we want broadband is the mantra here. Cost seems to be irrelevant to people here,it's just want

tototoe

Orebro wrote: »

Lets not forget it's €3Bn over TWENTY FIVE YEARS, with no major initial outlay. This is in no way like the NCH, totally unfair to compare them.

This will be looked back in time the same as rural electrification is now. There'll always be people like tototoe naysayers, like I'm sure there were when rural electrification was being rolled out. The shortsightedness of not seeing the benefits of the NBP is breath taking.

Not a naysayer, an nbp is essential. The current plan however, is not.

Gary kk

tototoe wrote: »

There is a lot of people not happy with €3 billion being quoted for this. It is mental, regardless of how many people want broadband. I was out canvassing for a local independent candidate recently in a relatively rural area and a lot of people are livid about this plan and the cost of it.....alongside the NCH. More people than were in support of it tbh. Its absolutely bonkers to spend 6000 a house to get people broadband....and the motivation for it now seems to be to fulfill a political promise, before elections. And even worse giving it to a bid, that has never been involved in domestic installations, or even the rollout of a telecoms network. That does not bode well.

FG are also currently getting a taste for the depth of feeling around their "government" outside their own bubble (and outside Dublin) and rightly so. Leo and co will likely meet more protestors today in Limerick.

Where was that and for who where you canvassing ? Oh and what age where this people that are saying it's a waste.

westyIrl

tototoe wrote: »

Not a naysayer, an nbp is essential. The current plan however, is not.

What form of an NBP would you suggest and at what price point regards subsidisation?

It's fair enough to say the current plan is mental but back yourself with a credible, future proofed alternative that's deliverable in a time frame that doesn't relegate rural Ireland to another decade of broadband provision paralysis.

Jim

Orebro

tototoe wrote: »

Not a naysayer, an nbp is essential. The current plan however, is not.

Perhaps you might inform us as to the party membership of the person you were canvassing for? I’d love to know who to make sure not to give any votes to.

theguzman

tototoe wrote: »

Not a naysayer, an nbp is essential. The current plan however, is not.

So basically people in the countryside should not have access to HighSpeed Internet? How would you propse to do it? Wireless and 5G options are not a solution, would take longer to implement at an almost similar cost but with the added Environmental devastation that 5G brings. Wireless is limited in bandwidth due to the laws of Physics but if you know something that Albert Einstein missed please let us know.

Fibre optic Internet travels at the speed of light and no known technology exists yet to travel faster than light although it maybe theoretically possible. A simple upgrade of the backend and GPON will allow that fibre to be updated and updated long into the future delivering not just megabits, gigabits but Petabytes and beyond. Fibre is the best solution and is future proofed ad-infinitum.

The costing is a busted flush as it is €3bn spread over 25 years, a tiny amount, however I would say that the National Broadband Plan costing €3bn will actually make money for the Govt with the added economic activity and stimulus it will generate. A whole vast new untapped market will come online and will be spending more in ecommerce, country people have more money in general as they own their own homes, receive large farm subsidy payments in many cases and benefit from a lower cost of living and the health benefits of country life.

Then there is the VAT the Govt will collect off the subscribers to the service, many of whom have no services or only trashy substandard DSL and wireless services. Then there will be the potential for alot of IT jobs to be decentralised out of Dublin to places like Donegal, Doolin and Dingle, the sort of places where alot of people would prefer to live were it not for the lack of proper internet access.

They could avail of lower costs of living, also it would allow commuters to maybe skip a day in the office and work from home, saving hugely on the carbon emissions of transport. E.g. if you are a woman living in West Cork you would face a 90 minute drive to Cork city to buy a Dress for your cousins wedding, with Fibreoptic broadband you may choose to buy it online and with the superhigh speed of Fibreoptic and Virtual reality etc. alot of unnecessary car journeys would be avoided.

Wireless will never be the answer, the laws of physics are irrefutable. We should not settle for mediocrity. As a rural dweller myself I would have gladly paid up to €5k to get a Fibre connection 10 years ago if it was possible.

Orebro

tototoe wrote: »

And where did I say there was no fixed broadband in the area? Where did I say what was available there at all.

I understand people want broadband, but not at any cost and certainly 3vn under the terms they are talking about....but we want broadband is the mantra here. Cost seems to be irrelevant to people here,it's just want

So they had fixed broadband, so were therefore complaining about money being spent for others to get it? Because I’m alright Jack!

tototoe

The politician was independent, not pbp or sf or fg or ff or any other party or grouping, has never run before

The idea that we should deliver ftth to every house in the country, in the way they seem to be planning, is mad. Rural broadband is an issue in more countries than ireland, and very few are promising fibre everywhere.

5g, who knows what that can or cant do at this stage, its largely unproven but the idea that we are future proofing is optimistic. You cant future proof technology, not even fibre. What is available to transfer data in 5, 10 years time is anyones guess

Build a high capacity core network with a widespread reach, and get private enterprise to distribute it beyond that at a cost that makes it commercially viable to do so. Intervene in cases where no solution can be found, make large amounts of bandwidth available at key points around rural ireland, , make public infrastructure and land available for towers, masts etc. Make it available cheap, so it does become attractive to distribute it , be that by fibre, wireless or mobile/lte etc . Invest in that, own it
not do what the government are planning,

Im not trying to pee on anyones cornflakes lads. This is a hot potato for the government, so it more than likely will go ahead, or be promised at least.
I just think the cost is exorbitant, and the structure of the whole thing is nuts

ED E

tototoe maybe read 1% of the friggin thread before jumping in. The DCCAE and previously Oscar Bravo on here have done a perfect job of explaining how we know 5G, and 6G in 2030 CANNOT solve this.

Fibre that runs 2.5Gb now can run 10Gb tomorrow if we want and 40Gb in a few years. There is a clear upgrade path. Its just a network of glass tubes we're building any any smarts we want can be added on either end.

marno21

tototoe wrote: »

The politician was independent, not pbp or sf or fg or ff or any other party or grouping, has never run before

The idea that we should deliver ftth to every house in the country, in the way they seem to be planning, is mad. Rural broadband is an issue in more countries than ireland, and very few are promising fibre everywhere.

5g, who knows what that can or cant do at this stage, its largely unproven but the idea that we are future proofing is optimistic. You cant future proof technology, not even fibre. What is available to transfer data in 5, 10 years time is anyones guess

Build a high capacity core network with a widespread reach, and get private enterprise to distribute it beyond that at a cost that makes it commercially viable to do so. Intervene in cases where no solution can be found, make large amounts of bandwidth available at key points around rural ireland, , make public infrastructure and land available for towers, masts etc. Make it available cheap, so it does become attractive to distribute it , be that by fibre, wireless or mobile/lte etc . Invest in that, own it
not do what the government are planning,

Im not trying to pee on anyones cornflakes lads. This is a hot potato for the government, so it more than likely will go ahead, or be promised at least.
I just think the cost is exorbitant, and the structure of the whole thing is nuts

Thanks to Claude Shannon, we have a fair idea. And he knew quite a bit more about this stuff than Peter Casey or any of the other pro 5G charlatans will ever know.

Gary kk

tototoe wrote: »

The politician was independent, not pbp or sf or fg or ff or any other party or grouping, has never run before

The idea that we should deliver ftth to every house in the country, in the way they seem to be planning, is mad. Rural broadband is an issue in more countries than ireland, and very few are promising fibre everywhere.

5g, who knows what that can or cant do at this stage, its largely unproven but the idea that we are future proofing is optimistic. You cant future proof technology, not even fibre. What is available to transfer data in 5, 10 years time is anyones guess

Build a high capacity core network with a widespread reach, and get private enterprise to distribute it beyond that at a cost that makes it commercially viable to do so. Intervene in cases where no solution can be found, make large amounts of bandwidth available at key points around rural ireland, , make public infrastructure and land available for towers, masts etc. Make it available cheap, so it does become attractive to distribute it , be that by fibre, wireless or mobile/lte etc . Invest in that, own it
not do what the government are planning,

Im not trying to pee on anyones cornflakes lads. This is a hot potato for the government, so it more than likely will go ahead, or be promised at least.
I just think the cost is exorbitant, and the structure of the whole thing is nuts

Yeah but could you name the politician please. Surly if what you said earlier about most people in rural Ireland been against this nbp it won't do any harm to thier chances in the election.

Gary kk

https://whereyourmoneygoes.gov.ie/en/

So for anyone that thinks 3billion is a lot of money over 20 years please look at the link and get some context of the governments budget.

Orebro

tototoe wrote: »

The politician was independent, not pbp or sf or fg or ff or any other party or grouping, has never run before

The idea that we should deliver ftth to every house in the country, in the way they seem to be planning, is mad. Rural broadband is an issue in more countries than ireland, and very few are promising fibre everywhere.

5g, who knows what that can or cant do at this stage, its largely unproven but the idea that we are future proofing is optimistic. You cant future proof technology, not even fibre. What is available to transfer data in 5, 10 years time is anyones guess

Build a high capacity core network with a widespread reach, and get private enterprise to distribute it beyond that at a cost that makes it commercially viable to do so. Intervene in cases where no solution can be found, make large amounts of bandwidth available at key points around rural ireland, , make public infrastructure and land available for towers, masts etc. Make it available cheap, so it does become attractive to distribute it , be that by fibre, wireless or mobile/lte etc . Invest in that, own it
not do what the government are planning,

Im not trying to pee on anyones cornflakes lads. This is a hot potato for the government, so it more than likely will go ahead, or be promised at least.
I just think the cost is exorbitant, and the structure of the whole thing is nuts

Thought you might throw the independent non-party answer alright. Although it’s fairly obvious it was FF.

It’s also obvious you have no idea what you’re talking about technology wise, so whoever you were representing would be wise to do some reading up on this before declaring policy on it.

user1842

FTTH (fibre to the home) is the only future proofed solution, period. There is no other solution, not 5G, not 6G not 7G and so on.

People who know even a small bit about networks and who dont have a vested interest are blue in the face saying this.

Im not happy with the way the NBP went, im not happy with the cost, im not happy about the lack of experience from the only remaining bidder but it is the only thing we have got. So just sign the contract and get it done.

Wanderer78

user1842 wrote:

FTTH (fibre to the home) is the only future proofed solution, period. There is no other solution, not 5G, not 6G not 7G and so on.

Its hard to justify dragging fibre up boreens for single homes, or even a couple of houses, its not viable at the moment, future proof, yup, but viable, no

Orebro

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Its hard to justify dragging fibre up boreens for single homes, or even a couple of houses, its not viable at the moment, future proof, yup, but viable, no

This "boreen" talk is getting fairly sickening at this stage, and is a great red herring to use for those opposing the NBP. Quit trolling and give a viable alternative.

Wanderer78

Orebro wrote: »

This "boreen" talk is getting fairly sickening at this stage, and is a great red herring to use for those opposing the NBP. Quit trolling and give a viable alternative.

its not viable to drag fibre up 'small roads', unless theres a considerable increase in public funding to do so, private operators cannot absorb these costs, these are the current facts on the matter. by all means lobby for these increase public funds, but be prepared for disappointment. since i dont truly understand the tech, i do not have a viable alternative. of course it would be great to have fibre all over the country, but...

The high horse brigade

Wanderer78 wrote: »

its not viable to drag fibre up 'small roads', unless theres a considerable increase in public funding to do so, private operators cannot absorb these costs, these are the current facts on the matter. by all means lobby for these increase public funds, but be prepared for disappointment. since i dont truly understand the tech, i do not have a viable alternative. of course it would be great to have fibre all over the country, but...

I'm alright Jack... Get your hands off my stack... ♪┌|∵|┘♪

Orebro

The high horse brigade wrote: »

I'm alright Jack... Get your hands off my stack... ♪┌|∵|┘♪

Exactly.

Tigerandahalf

FG will have to roll out fibre. If they don't they will be wiped out in rural Ireland and FF will be back. FF will have no problem commiting to a deal.

My only reservation about this is the tendering and who owns what after. The ESB should really have been tasked to carry it out. They have an excellent record in getting the network back on track after storms etc. The broadband network should be owned by the state.

Orebro

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

FG will have to roll out fibre. If they don't they will be wiped out in rural Ireland and FF will be back. FF will have no problem commiting to a deal.

My only reservation about this is the tendering and who owns what after. The ESB should really have been tasked to carry it out. They have an excellent record in getting the network back on track after storms etc. The broadband network should be owned by the state.

The ESB pulled out of it. And it’s not legal to just hand the job to an entity to do, it must be tendered for. Jesus, how many times does this have to be said!

Wanderer78

The high horse brigade wrote: »

I'm alright Jack... Get your hands off my stack... ♪┌|∵|┘♪

wtf! :rolleyes: fibre, no question, technically is the way forward but... id really love to see fibre everywhere but...

Tigerandahalf

Orebro wrote: »

The ESB pulled out of it. And it’s not legal to just hand the job to an entity to do, it must be tendered for. Jesus, how many times does this have to be said!

The ESB is a semi-state. They could be mandated to take on the responsibility.

The high horse brigade

Wanderer78 wrote: »

wtf! :rolleyes: fibre, no question, technically is the way forward but... id really love to see fibre everywhere but...

But what? €3Billion and it's in motion :rolleyes:

The Cush

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

The ESB is a semi-state. They could be mandated to take on the responsibility.

Yes, but without state subsidy under EU competition regulations.

Tigerandahalf

You would also have to question if it is safe for the infrastructure to be left in private hands. Look at the concerns Amercia has about huawei products and possible Chinese interference.
Should a private company be in a position like that?

They really made a balls of this.

turbbo

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

You would also have to question if it is safe for the infrastructure to be left in private hands. Look at the concerns Amercia has about huawei products and possible Chinese interference.
Should a private company be in a position like that?

They really made a balls of this.

Isn't all of the existing network as it is today made of huawei gear? If your core network is already huawei - is that not just nit picking at this stage?

Orebro

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

You would also have to question if it is safe for the infrastructure to be left in private hands. Look at the concerns Amercia has about huawei products and possible Chinese interference.
Should a private company be in a position like that?

They really made a balls of this.

:rolleyes:

The comments here are really getting comical. Can you explain what you mean by this? Eir have their private infrastructure, as do many other companies - what are you getting at?

Jakey Rolling

theguzman wrote: »

So basically people in the countryside should not have access to HighSpeed Internet?...

Fibre optic Internet travels at the speed of light and no known technology exists yet to travel faster than light although it maybe theoretically possible..

I agree with the thrust of your post, but to be pedantic the signal in fibre only propogates at around 66% of speed of light. Copper and wireless signals both travel faster.

However usable bandwidth is higher over fibre due to the higher frequencies used, and transmission backoff is much less of an issue than with a shared broadcast medium such as wireless.

Orebro

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

The ESB is a semi-state. They could be mandated to take on the responsibility.

Can you expand on this? The ESB submitted their bid, which it turns out was similar in cost to all the others, and then pulled out.

Orebro

Jakey Rolling wrote: »

I agree with the thrust of your post, but to be pedantic the signal in fibre only propogates at around 66% of speed of light. Copper and wireless signals both travel faster.

However usable bandwidth is higher over fibre due to the higher frequencies used, and transmission backoff is much less of an issue than with a shared broadcast medium such as wireless.

Data transmission on copper is faster than fibre? Back to physics class I think Jakey.

Johnboy1951

Orebro wrote: »

Can you expand on this? The ESB submitted their bid, which it turns out was similar in cost to all the others, and then pulled out.

No, the partnership of Vodafone and ESB, called Siro submitted a bid.
It was a commercial bid the same as the other bidders.

The Cush wrote:

Yes, but without state subsidy under EU competition regulations.

Is there some indication how much of this €3 bn will actually come out of state coffers?

There is VAT included in that price which can be deducted and also whatever the EU subsidy might be, which I have no idea about based on the present figure.

Is there possibly other monies that should not be included in a net figure of what the NBP actually costs the state?

Tigerandahalf

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/esb-should-build-broadband-network-in-co-operation-with-other-state-utilities-1.3665640

The above Irish Times article would sum up my views on it.

I would say the state made a mistake owing to the worry of finance required being put on the national balance sheet. Thus they went down the wrong route leaving us where we are today.

The high horse brigade

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/esb-should-build-broadband-network-in-co-operation-with-other-state-utilities-1.3665640

The above Irish Times article would sum up my views on it.

I would say the state made a mistake owing to the worry of finance required being put on the national balance sheet. Thus they went down the wrong route leaving us where we are today.

That horse bolted long ago, get over it!

We are left with the NBP as it stands. We either go with it or start again costing us another 8 years

digiman

Orebro wrote: »

Data transmission on copper is faster than fibre? Back to physics class I think Jakey.

The key point is that the latency is greater in fibre.

Fibre had a refractive index of about 0.66 which means that it reflects internally in the fibre and thus travels a further distance than the length of the cable.

Wireless doesn't have that problem which means that the latency using for example a microwave radio is less than using fibre between the same 2 physically places.