NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

rob808

tvc15 wrote: »

A neighbor of mine had imagine out in Kildare for their attempt at their fibreconnect broadband trial but they couldn't get a signal anywhere on the exterior of the house, what would be their plan for national broadband in these cases

i say statellite they would use that why we need eir,siro to win.

tvc15

rob808 wrote: »

i say statellite they would use that why we need eir,siro to win.

Can satellite actually meet the requirements?

dbit

tvc15 wrote: »

Can satellite actually meet the requirements?

Nope not for anything usefull dreadfull pings and very limited caps for home users.

rob808

tvc15 wrote: »

Can satellite actually meet the requirements?

statellite would only be use as last resort for really hard places to reach.It hard to say how NBP will go and with imagine going after the upload speed and the cut with the money ain't looking good for NBP.

Gonzo

cowboys like Imagine shouldn't even be allowed bid for the scheme if all they are willing to provide is crappy wireless. The has to be fixed line/fibre plans only.

rob808

Gonzo wrote: »

cowboys like Imagine shouldn't even be allowed bid for the scheme if all they are willing to provide is crappy wireless. The has to be fixed line/fibre plans only.

It really the EU at fault with there state aid rules not allowing one technology be used even if it the best.They just give us 75 million how miserable they are,and imagine and ripplecom wish they just feck off trying to lower the 6mb upload to just 2mb.

tsue921i8wljb3

Gonzo wrote: »

cowboys like Imagine shouldn't even be allowed bid for the scheme if all they are willing to provide is crappy wireless. The has to be fixed line/fibre plans only.

It's not only Imagine. I give you the ISPAI WISP group which represents 26 regional WISPs. In their submission signed by John McDonnell we also get some interesting quotes. In amongst their usual shouting for more spectrum there is the following quote:

In many WISP networks today, over 50% of the traffic comprises Google (Youtube), Netflix, Facebook and other social media data flows. While not wishing to comment on customers' use of the internet in any way, many users avail of the internet for purely entertainment purposes. Is this a good enough reason to warrant proposed Government subvention of the scale being proposed?

There is also then the somewhat bizzare occurance of a group of ISPs seeming to argue that the computers may not be all that great for the development of primary school children by quoting an OECD report that found that heavy use of computers at school led to worse learning outcomes.

The WISP members of the ISPAI are:

Ripple Communications Limited Rapid Broadband Limited Ninetreehill Broadband Limited Interpoint Technologies Ltd. T/A Munster Broadband Clare Rural Broadband Limited permaNET Ltd. Real Broadband Ltd. Aptus Ltd. Skytel Networks Ireland Limited Celtic Broadband Ltd Airwave Internet Kernet Broadband Kerry Broadband Ltd. LINK Broadband Ltd. Wireless Connect Ltd. Premier Data Networks Limited Munster Wireless Ltd. Total Wireless Ltd. Atlantek Computers Ltd. Carnsore Broadband Limited DigitalForge Nova Networks Ltd T/A Nova Broadband Echo IT Broadband Ltd. Regional Telecom Lighthouse Networks Ltd. T/A Lightnet Net1 Ltd.

tsue921i8wljb3

Not wanting to tar all WISPs with the same brush I must applaud the Westnet submission for it's honesty. Some quotes:

A download speed of 30Mb/s and an upload speed of 6Mb/s are deeply unambitious targets. While speeds of 30/6 technically represent a step change from the basic broadband services (and in many cases, complete absence of broadband services) that are currently available, for an intervention of this scale merely to deliver services that have already been completely outpaced in most urban (and indeed some rural) areas would be a tragically missed opportunity, and - rather than addressing it - would actually entrench the urban/rural digital divide.

Bidders may be encouraged to "provide innovative and cost-effective technologies to deliver the tender requirements", but they must also be required to demonstrate that those technologies are actually capable of delivering more than marketing promises.

The objective of this intervention should be to build infrastructure that can provide a platform for as-yet unimagined services. Proposals for platforms that only barely meet the already-obsolete definition of "next generation", or that promise scalability that has yet to be demonstrated outside of laboratory conditions, should be treated with healthy skepticism.

Apart from terrain, other considerations that pose challenges to wireless coverage are trees, wind farms, and the requirement to develop new wireless high sites (often in the face of intense local opposition).

Finally, wireless technologies simply won't scale. Providing a wireless service to remote premises condemns them to second-class status when fibre-based products quickly overtake anything that can realistically be provided on a wireless network.

rob808

Well this ISPAI WISP group seem to don't care about rural people internet all they seem to be doing is trying to degrade the NBP to lower speeds and keeping there monopoly.

xxyyzz

rob808 wrote: »

Well this ISPAI WISP group seem to don't care about rural people internet all they seem to be doing is trying to degrade the NBP to lower speeds and keeping there monopoly.

The thing is though, without WISP's there would be little to no rural broadband anyway as there is very little appetite to bring any other sort of broadband outside of urban areas. They are filling a gap in the market, if alternatives to wireless existed I'd jump at them straight away but until then I'm thankful to them.

Having said that I think that the NBP is a timely kick in the arse for some WISPS forcing them to innovate because if it does come to fruition they are out of business. I know Kerry Broadband are doing fibre trials at the moment to offer an alternative to Eir/SIRO. That kind of competition can only be a good thing.

The quote above did make my blood boil though

In many WISP networks today, over 50% of the traffic comprises Google (Youtube), Netflix, Facebook and other social media data flows. While not wishing to comment on customers' use of the internet in any way, many users avail of the internet for purely entertainment purposes. Is this a good enough reason to warrant proposed Government subvention of the scale being proposed?

I'm with Kerry broadband and due to contention between 7PM and 11pm there isn't a hope in hell of any sort of streaming anything. I had to cancel my netflix subscription.

KOR101

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

It's not only Imagine. I give you the ISPAI WISP group which represents 26 regional WISPs. In their submission signed by John McDonnell we also get some interesting quotes. In amongst their usual shouting for more spectrum there is the following quote:

In many WISP networks today, over 50% of the traffic comprises Google (Youtube), Netflix, Facebook and other social media data flows. While not wishing to comment on customers' use of the internet in any way, many users avail of the internet for purely entertainment purposes. Is this a good enough reason to warrant proposed Government subvention of the scale being proposed?

There is also then the somewhat bizzare occurance of a group of ISPs seeming to argue that the computers may not be all that great for the development of primary school children by quoting an OECD report that found that heavy use of computers at school led to worse learning outcomes.

Lets hope the other 'step change argument is also BS. It's a pity the WISPS can't be thrown some sort bone, otherwise a legal suit to delay things, or worse, seems inevitable.

rob808

xxyyzz wrote: »

The thing is though, without WISP's there would be little to no rural broadband anyway as there is very little appetite to bring any other sort of broadband outside of urban areas. They are filling a gap in the market, if alternatives to wireless existed I'd jump at them straight away but until then I'm thankful to them.

Having said that I think that the NBP is a timely kick in the arse for some WISPS forcing them to innovate because if it does come to fruition they are out of business. I know Kerry Broadband are doing fibre trials at the moment to offer an alternative to Eir/SIRO. That kind of competition can only be a good thing.

well that true but at same time they shouldn't be trying to change NBP like 30mb and 6mb up isn't really great compared to urban areas.

xxyyzz

rob808 wrote: »

well that true but at same time they shouldn't be trying to change NBP like 30mb and 6mb up isn't really great compared to urban areas.

Yeah, fully agree. However, I don't know if they have a leg to stand on anyway, a tender was put out with minimum requirements and if they don't meet it then tough sh*t they're out. They are not going to be forced to shut down so the onus is on them to either innovate or GTFO because they will be left behind. As I mentioned at least one WISP is experimenting with FTTH and these will be the ones who will survive.

Johnboy1951

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

The WISP members of the ISPAI are:

Ripple Communications Limited Rapid Broadband Limited Ninetreehill Broadband Limited Interpoint Technologies Ltd. T/A Munster Broadband

Clare Rural Broadband Limited
permaNET Ltd.
Real Broadband Ltd.
Aptus Ltd.
......

I cannot seem to find this "Clare Rural Broadband Limited" on line.
Anyone got info?

KOR101

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I cannot seem to find this "Clare Rural Broadband Limited" on line.
Anyone got info?

http://clarebroadband.ie/

tsue921i8wljb3

There is another submission by Nigel Young representing four WISPs namely:

Ajisko Ltd (t/a) Integrated Media Solutions Interpoint Technologies Ltd Lighthouse Networks Ltd t/a Lightnet Ninetreehill Broadband Ltd

According to Solocheck Nigel Young is a director of Ninetreehill Broadband Limited.

He states that:

Approximately 62% of the Irish population is now urban based. Ultra-fast coverage provided by the USP incumbent Eircom (now Eir), UPC and shortly SIRO (using the State’s already existing and extensive ESB fibre optic cable network) appears to be well on track to satisfy and indeed exceed the DAE’s 50% ultra-fast objective on or before 2020. There are therefore no exceptional circumstances justifying State aid for measures requiring FTTP (or FTTC plus DOCSIS 3) under the SAG.

So because some major towns and cities have access to true high-speed broadband he is happy to save the state money by cementing the urban/rural digital divide. Coincidentally this aligns with his own business interests.

Mr Young then goes on to propse a theory where both Siro and Eir would both be barred from receiving State Aid under the NBP effectively blocking them from bidding.

He states that the WISP group had retained the services, as a consultant, of well known economist Mr Colm McCarthy. The purpose of this was:

... to examine the government’s NBP proposals inter alia to examine if and how the NBP objectives could be achieved at lesser cost.

I wonder what a lesser cost option would be?

The WISPs want wireless to be part of the NBP. This goes against the advice of (organisations who have responded to this consultation):

BT Corning eir enet Gigabit Fibre HEAnet Ireland Offline Irish Academy of Engineering Irish Farmers Association Siro WestNet

All the above believe that a full fibre network is the correct solution.

KOR101

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

So because some major towns and cities have access to true high-speed broadband he is happy to save the state money by cementing the urban/rural digital divide.

Thanks for these posts, but aren't these responses to the DCENR July consultations. We know from the Intervention Strategy that the government isn't buying any of this. It's fibre and 1 or 2 contracts. Do any of these arguments carry legal weight? -I don't know, we would need posters with legal expertise in this area.

I was just reading some of the facebook entries for my local WISP SCC.

https://www.facebook.com/SCCBroadband/

They are promoting the recent connection of their service to the fibre in Kenmare, and the resulting improvement in bandwidth volume for their network. I can easily imagine in the future that they would be doing the same as they connect their customers to SIROs or EIRs fibre.

tsue921i8wljb3

KOR101 wrote: »

Thanks for these posts, but aren't these responses to the DCENR July consultations. We know from the Intervention Strategy that the government isn't buying any of this. It's fibre and 1 or 2 contracts. Do any of these arguments carry legal weight? -I don't know, we would need posters with legal expertise in this area.

I was just reading some of the facebook entries for my local WISP SCC.

https://www.facebook.com/SCCBroadband/

They are promoting the recent connection of their service to the fibre in Kenmare, and the resulting improvement in bandwidth volume for their network. I can easily imagine in the future that they would be doing the same as they connect their customers to SIROs or EIRs fibre.

Yes they are responses to the July consultation. I also agree with you that the DCENR do favour a fibre solution but there are a lot of disgruntled WISPSs out there. If they are willing to hire Colm McCarthy I'm sure that they will be willing to hire the top senior counsels to drag this through the Irish and European courts. Although I am not a legal expert so I do not know if they can actually hold up the process.

rob808

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

Yes they are responses to the July consultation. I also agree with you that the DCENR do favour a fibre solution but there are a lot of disgruntled WISPSs out there. If they are willing to hire Colm McCarthy I'm sure that they will be willing to hire the top senior counsels to drag this through the Irish and European courts. Although I am not a legal expert so I do not know if they can actually hold up the process.

I can't understand why they can't do the 30mb and 6up is it because they don't want to upgrade there network or is it they just want to degrade our NBP to slower speeds because they believe we don't need faster broadband.

tsue921i8wljb3

rob808 wrote: »

I can't understand why the can't do the 30mb and 6up is it because they don't want to upgrade there network or is it they just want to degrade our NBP to slower speeds because they believe we don't need faster broadband.

It's mainly to do with spectrum. To improve their speeds they need extra spectrum. Their networks, at the minute using mainly unlicensed frequencies, are struggling to keep up with the bandwidth demands, nevermind allowing 30/6 Mb for all. They are blaming ComReg for the uncertainty around upcoming spectrum awards.

It has to be said though that even with more spectrum allocated wireless is still vastly inferior to a fibre based network.

bminish

rob808 wrote: »

I can't understand why they can't do the 30mb and 6up is it because they don't want to upgrade there network or is it they just want to degrade our NBP to slower speeds because they believe we don't need faster broadband.

The pesky laws of physics are most inconvenient, More available spectrum would be a big help but would still only buy us a few years of traffic volume growth at best.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon%E2%80%93Hartley_theorem

A 5Km line of sight microwave path has a path loss of around 122dB, 5Km of Fibre has a path loss of ~1dB

http://www.thefoa.org/tech/SM%20fibre%20selection.pdf

Fibre also has lots of capacity to meet future needs, each DWDM channel has more 'spectrum' than the sum total of all the usable radio spectrum

http://www.fiberdyne.com/products/itu-grid.html

Thus it is our view that if the state is to involve it's self in a major infrastructure investment, it needs to be based on Technology that has a current (and proven) roadmap in terms of scaling for the long term future needs of users. Anything less than this is just more market distortion.

Brendan Minish (CTO Westnet)

tsue921i8wljb3

bminish wrote: »

The pesky laws of physics are most inconvenient, More available spectrum would be a big help but would still only buy us a few years of traffic volume growth at best.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon%E2%80%93Hartley_theorem

A 5Km line of sight microwave path has a path loss of around 122dB, 5Km of Fibre has a path loss of ~1dB

http://www.thefoa.org/tech/SM%20fibre%20selection.pdf

Fibre also has lots of capacity to meet future needs, each DWDM channel has more 'spectrum' than the sum total of all the usable radio spectrum

http://www.fiberdyne.com/products/itu-grid.html

Thus it is our view that if the state is to involve it's self in a major infrastructure investment, it needs to be based on Technology that has a current (and proven) roadmap in terms of scaling for the long term future needs of users. Anything less than this is just more market distortion.

Brendan Minish (CTO Westnet)

Brendan, I mentioned it in a previous post but I must again commend your companies response to the DCENR consultation. I assume you are responsible for it. Thank you for your honesty and foresight.

bminish

Siena Gigantic Backyard wrote: »

Brendan, I mentioned it in a previous post but I must again commend your companies response to the DCENR consultation. I assume you are responsible for it. Thank you for your honesty and foresight.

Only in parts, it's the combined views of our board.

Brendan Minish (CTO Westnet)

2forjoy

today david cameron has promised super fast broadband to all consumers in uk by 2020 .

If only we could get a pledge

AlmightyCushion

2forjoy wrote: »

today david cameron has promised super fast broadband to all consumers in uk by 2020 .

If only we could get a pledge

He promised 10Mbps. You have to remember though that back in 2010 his party promised that the UK would have the fastest broadband in Europe by 2015. They failed to live up to that promise and as of the end of 2014, Ireland is ranked higher than the UK by Akamai.

Kristopherus

2forjoy wrote: »

today david cameron has promised super fast broadband to all consumers in uk by 2020 .

If only we could get a pledge

At considerably less speeds that will be available here within the same timescale. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057131437&page=160

dbit

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

He promised 10Mbps. You have to remember though that back in 2010 his party promised that the UK would have the fastest broadband in Europe by 2015. They failed to live up to that promise and as of the end of 2014, Ireland is ranked higher than the UK by Akamai.

Out dem Tans !!! lol.

ED E

UK: 262 people per km^2
IRL: 65 people per km^2

Its way easier for them to deploy access networks as the ROI is much better, far less covering an 8km radius for 30 dwellings.

Its laughable how we're about to completely destroy them in the rankings.

KOR101

A long IT article about EIR's proposed running of FTTH to 300,000 rura homes on a commercial basis.

Sparks fly as Minister and Eir battle it out over broadband

Eir threw something of a curveball at Minister for Communications Alex White recently. His big plan to connect rural Ireland to high-speed broadband was almost hatched when the former State-owned telco changed the parameters.

White and his team had spent months engaging with industry and stakeholders to ascertain the scale of market failure in the sector. Based on the business plans of providers, including Eir – formerly Eircom – his department drew up a map of the areas deemed not to be commercially viable for private broadband providers to cover, as required under EU rules for state aid interventions.

It covered a substantial 30 per cent of the market, equating to 757,000 homes and premises, three times the Europe average. More than 80,000 farms – 94 per cent of the total and the backbone of the rural economy – were located in broadband blackspots.

Decades of bad planning, one-off housing and under-investment had come home to roost, and was exacerbating Ireland’s two-speed economy.

Armed with his map and a raft of consultants’ reports, White secured Cabinet approval for a major Government intervention and the biggest policy initiative of his ministerial tenure.

However, just weeks before the big launch, Eir announced it had revised its business plan and could now supply high-speed connectivity on a commercial basis to an additional 300,000 homes in the intervention area.

The Minister proceeded with the launch as planned, using the original intervention area, but signalling that it may need to be revised.

The Government should, in theory, welcome Eir’s move to take a bigger slice of the pie as it reduces the cost of intervention to the State. However, the Minister’s actions in the wake of the company’s manoeuvre suggest a certain degree of caution.

First, he sent a team of accountants and engineers into Eir to verify if it could undertake the pledges in its new business plan, having previously taken the company at its word.

He also intends to make the company sign a “commitment contract” before entering the tender process. This will be done under the cover of making all prospective bidders sign such contracts.

Perhaps this isn’t surprising given the telecommunications company’s recent history. It has been flipped three times and loaded with debt since its privatisation in the 1990s and exited examinership only two years ago.

Industry sources argue Eir’s move could queer the pitch for rivals and potentially drag out the process. With a shrunken intervention area, the Government’s contract has been reduced to only the hardest-to-reach places, making it significantly less desirable. This may push others out of the race and land Eir the contract by default.

According to a well-placed insider, Eir needs “an IPO story that it can sell to the markets”. This has to be based on growth or protected revenues from its legacy network, he said.

Securing the Government contract or, at least ensuring it is not lost, before going to market is thus seen as important.

Selling the company for its owners – a 150-strong group of banks and hedge funds, including Blackstone – at price close to €2 billion would, under standard corporate practice, see Eir’s management team secure generous bonuses. A figure of €60 million has previously been reported elsewhere.

A spokesman for the company told The Irish Times that its updated business plan reflected a more optimistic view of future demand and an ongoing fall in technology costs.

“Eir reviewed its investment plans based on key inputs, including costs of rollout, customer response etc given that its Eir fibre programme was, at that stage, reaching 1 million premises,” he said.

“This analysis – a normal prudent approach to a new relatively high risk investment in national infrastructure – concluded that the then planned final footprint of 1.6 million premises could be extended further on a commercial basis to 1.9 million premises.

“In June 2015, Eir announced this revised investment plan which was warmly welcomed by the Minister and other key stakeholders in particular in rural Ireland.

“In July 2015, the Government launched a further consultation on key elements of the National Broadband Plan. It acknowledged that it had received further investment plans from various operators but decided to leave the proposed intervention map as originally published pending further assessment of these plans.”

The company said it fully recognised the requirements for access to high-speed broadband in Ireland and “no one has demonstrated more ambition, delivered more or plans to go further across the country than Eir”.

It also noted it had spent in excess of €300 million specifically on fibre rollout as part of over €1 billion in capital investment over the past three years and had repeatedly met or exceeded its own rollout timelines.

The spokesman said the company planned to invest another €1.5 billion in its network over the next five to seven years – and would hook up the additional 300,000 homes to its high-speed fibre product.

The Minister was again pressed in the Dáil this week as to what stage the plan was at. He said he expected to publish an updated version of the map, finalise the strategy and move to the formal procurement phase before the end of the year.

A department spokesman said “the proposed Eir investment” was potentially very significant and, like other operator plans, required careful analysis. He said the company’s updated plan had prompted a further consultation period, announced by the department in late October.

As part of that process, the department set out the heads of the contract that it proposes to ask all operators who have future investment plans to agree, noting “the proposed contract is not limited to Eir only”.

“As we move closer to formal procurement, it is critical that the department is assured that these investments will materialise,” he said. “The Government has committed to ensuring that every premise in Ireland has access to at least 30 megabits per second (mbps) broadband and has repeatedly stated that the National Broadband Plan aims to deal conclusively with Ireland’s connectivity challenges.

“That means ensuring that all promised commercial investment materialises – regardless of the operator – and that a State intervention provides for the remaining areas,” he added.

Eir’s main rival in the process appears to be Siro, a joint venture between the ESB and Vodafone Ireland, which is investing €450 million in a fibre-to-the-building network, primarily aimed at 50 regional towns.

Other potential bidders could include new entrant Gigabit Fibre, fronted by former O2 Ireland boss Danuta Gray; UPC, which is now owned by Virgin, giving it extra financial muscle; and BT, which has exited the domestic market but maintains a foothold in the corporate market.

No one has put a figure on the overall cost of the scheme and, for obvious reasons, the Government is keeping shtum. At best guess, it is expected to cost between €500 million and €1 billion, with the Government stumping up half the cash in some form of public private partnership. An initial allocation of €275 million for rural broadband up until 2018 was announced in the Government’s latest capital spending plans.

The Minister has already signalled the tender will involve multiple lots, meaning more than one company could be involved.

The most controversial aspect of the tender is the relatively low bar set on broadband speed, with the minimum download set at a 30 mbps. When you consider that US telecoms watchdog FCC, the equivalent of Comreg here, believes speeds of less than 25 mbps no longer fits the definition broadband, this is hardly going to put rural Ireland on a digital fast-track, not with 4G and fibre broadband fast becoming the benchmarks.

KOR101

And the Dail Q and A with Minister White.......

https://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2015-11-10a.109&s=speaker%3A275#g120

Johnboy1951

UPC, which is now owned by Virgin, giving it extra financial muscle

As I understood UPC did not change ownership just its marketing name.
It continues to be owned by Liberty Global which also owns Virgin Media.
I fail to see from where the additional 'financial muscle' comes.

Eir(com) have succeeded in upsetting things as no doubt was their intention.

I hope the government insist on their commercial roll out to those 300k homes be done at the same time as the NBP, if not before.
I reckon it would not be any trouble to eir to agree to do the extra commercial roll out prior to any NBP connections in each area, as generally they seem to be needed for eir's NBP roll out in any case.

I just hope it is put in writing without any loopholes or opt outs.

ED E

TBH its SIRO that may have caused this. If eir commit to those 300k now and do them it takes them out of the pool to be shared with all NBP operators. They're calling "dibs" because the ESB are on their heels (sort of anyways).


AFAIK LibG owned UPC and VM (along with Cello and the rest). VM has now taken over UPC IRL, so now its a three tier relationship vs a two tier relationship previously. Accounting/Financially that may give them better access to capital. Not that they'll use it unless they decide to go rapidly D3.1.

Gonzo

Hopefully Eir can be encouraged to start the 300,000 rural blue lines a bit earlier during 2016 than sometime during 2017 which seems so far away from now.

xxyyzz

Does anybody know if the current map on http://www.openeir.ie/Our_Network/ contains the proposed new 300,000 houses or will they be added at a future date?

MajesticDonkey

xxyyzz wrote: »

Does anybody know if the current map on http://www.openeir.ie/Our_Network/ contains the proposed new 300,000 houses or will they be added at a future date?

This has the proposed rural fibre routes: http://fibrerollout.ie/where-and-when/

xxyyzz

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

This has the proposed rural fibre routes: http://fibrerollout.ie/where-and-when/

so near and yet so far. The blue line ends 200m from my house

The Cush

xxyyzz wrote: »

Does anybody know if the current map on http://www.openeir.ie/Our_Network/ contains the proposed new 300,000 houses

I'd guess it does, my local area wasn't included in any of the previous FTTH announcements but the blue lines on the map now extend out from the local exchange on the rural roads since their announcement to add the extra premises..

xxyyzz

The Cush wrote: »

I'd guess it does, my local area wasn't included in any of the previous FTTH announcements but the blue lines on the map now extend out from the local exchange on the rural roads.

Not sure about that. The fibre finishes at the green circle and currently the existing phone line finishes there also. My house is at the red arrow and the phone line that comes to my house comes along the road at the top of the image following the blue arrows

The Cush

xxyyzz wrote: »

Not sure about that.

Sorry I wasn't clear, the 300,000 are included in the map along the blue line routes, the rest of us outside the blue line areas will have to wait for the NBP.

rob808

Gonzo wrote: »

Hopefully Eir can be encouraged to start the 300,000 rural blue lines a bit earlier during 2016 than sometime during 2017 which seems so far away from now.

I think they are because if look at NGA Map if click one of announce townlands it say 2016-2020.

Johnboy1951

Gonzo wrote: »

Hopefully Eir can be encouraged to start the 300,000 rural blue lines a bit earlier during 2016 than sometime during 2017 which seems so far away from now.

I see it this way ..... If eir get the NBP contract for an area which has blue lines next to/in it then those 'blue lines' will be done first so that the fibre can be continued out to the NBP area from there.
The NBP would help greatly with financing that roll out.

So if my blue lines are not within an NBP area allocated to eir then I will not expect to receive eir fibre until near the end of the complete roll out time frame.


On the other hand if I were a competitor of eir and got a NBP contract, I would be inclined to do the areas with eir blue lines first and be able to offer (commercially) fibre connections to all those I passed while getting to the NBP subsidised area of the contract.

It will be interesting to see how things pan out ...... the eir blue lines announcement might come back to bite them yet.

jd

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how things pan out ...... the eir blue lines announcement might come back to bite them yet.

I suspect a lot of the rural copper network is due maintenance, and marginal cost of doing fibre at the same time is quite low these days.

Johnboy1951

jd wrote: »

I suspect a lot of the rural copper network is due maintenance, and marginal cost of doing fibre at the same time is quite low these days.

I was more thinking about the reaction to the blue lines of some non-eir company who got a contract for a portion of the NBP area.

tsue921i8wljb3

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I was more thinking about the reaction to the blue lines of some non-eir company who got a contract for a portion of the NBP area.

I think that their announcement of the blue lines was eir's attempt at becoming the sole NBP contractor.

KOR101

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

On the other hand if I were a competitor of eir and got a NBP contract, I would be inclined to do the areas with eir blue lines first and be able to offer (commercially) fibre connections to all those I passed while getting to the NBP subsidised area of the contract.

Just reading that, it brings home to me just what a head start EIR have over the others. You can't just magic up fibre in the Black Valley.

Falcon L

I don't believe that those blue lines should be taken too seriously. There is a lane near me - not even a lane really, about a meter wide sand track, the odd horse and hiker use it - is blue lined on the map. No pole route currently exists here, and no houses even adjacent to it.

Johnboy1951

Falcon L wrote: »

I don't believe that those blue lines should be taken too seriously. There is a lane near me - not even a lane really, about a meter wide sand track, the odd horse and hiker use it - is blue lined on the map. No pole route currently exists here, and no houses even adjacent to it.

I see a blue line going through a farmers gate near me, into a field to a haybarn

(I think it was a right of way in 'olden times')

rob808

Falcon L wrote: »

I don't believe that those blue lines should be taken too seriously. There is a lane near me - not even a lane really, about a meter wide sand track, the odd horse and hiker use it - is blue lined on the map. No pole route currently exists here, and no houses even adjacent to it.

There gona do it in more detail when that townlands get FTTH with small changes.

BandMember

Falcon L wrote: »

I don't believe that those blue lines should be taken too seriously. There is a lane near me - not even a lane really, about a meter wide sand track, the odd horse and hiker use it - is blue lined on the map. No pole route currently exists here, and no houses even adjacent to it.

I definitely wouldn't take those blue lines seriously as they make no sense whatsoever. You want to see the blue lines in some counties - they are in the middle of absolutely nowhere with no houses or townlands even near them! There's one near me that's on a mountain that has absolutely nothing near it for miles apart from rushes and swampland. Unless maybe a lost sheep wanders nearby, there's no point. Unless he wants to check the prices at the mart.... :pac:

rob808

BandMember wrote: »

I definitely wouldn't take those blue lines seriously as they make no sense whatsoever. You want to see the blue lines in some counties - they are in the middle of absolutely nowhere with no houses or townlands even near them! There's one near me that's on a mountain that has absolutely nothing near it for miles apart from rushes and swampland. Unless maybe a lost sheep wanders nearby, there's no point. Unless he wants to check the prices at the mart.... :pac:

well yea because they haven't completed there detail planning yet so there be changes to blue lines just hope it doesn't disappear from my house.