NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

bk

damienirel wrote: »

Don't forget they haven't started yet, how long have they been talking about it though? I wouldn't mind if they started and we would then see if 5 years was long enough or not. The way it is now it will be late next year if they do start then, who knows? After that we face 5 years min - wouldn't be surprised if it goes way past that.
Rural Electrification started in the 40's afaik. I'm not sure how much machinery ESB had back then but you can be sure they didn't have anything like what we have now, standalone cherry pickers, cherry pickers on the backs of vans. Massive tractor powered hedge cutters, jcbs, diggers, mini-diggers, vans, lorries mobile phones. I can see some similarities in that it's rural but that's about it.

Rural electrification scheme started in 1946, but it certainly was talked about for years, if not decades prior to it's start.

As for your point on improved machinery, that is certainly true, but you also have to keep in mind the strict health and safety rules that exist today, which can slow down things a lot, but certainly didn't exist in the 40's.

Also there are far mores homes in rural Ireland today and they are far more dispersed then they were in the 40's. One off houses is a relatively new phenomenon enabled largely by the car. In the 40's most rural houses were clustered around villages, compared to our modern and much harder to service ribbon style development.

I'm not saying this will take 40 years, but it does show the scale of the job to be done.

damienirel wrote: »

hmmm nowhere else in the world - are you sure of that? fairly sweeping statement!

Not really. You have to remember rural Ireland is one of the least densely populated places in the whole of Europe, while we also have one of the highest percentage of rural dwellers in Europe (40%, compared to just 10% in the UK for instance).

The idea of one off rural houses just doesn't happen in most other European countries, where they normally have very strict planning laws that new houses can only built within 1km of a village etc.

People talk about FTTH in Sweden, Norway, etc. But personally having hiked all over these lovely countries, I can assure you that 1 or 2km outside cities and towns there simply are no houses at all. I would often pass little hamlets of 3 or 4 houses in the countryside, all boarded up! Their populations have all moved to the cities and towns. That makes FTTH much easier.

Irelands rural population really is very unique in Europe.

oscarBravo

damienirel wrote: »

Lol! true I guess but I certainly don't think being delayed and going past deadlines equates to doing it properly either. Lots of FUs happen slowly.

Have you ever been in charge of a massive project? Not on this scale necessarily, but one involving a large budget, lots of people, and several subcontractors?

It's not easy to estimate how long a project of this scale will take, especially when the first phase of the project involves hiring consultants (and being criticised for doing so) to tell you what the rest of the phases will involve.

plodder wrote: »

So, they cant be sued by losing bidders afterwards? That is fair enough. It's just when people mention tribunals and what went on between Michael Lowry and Denis O'Brien, I'm not sure how you can legislate for that. I'd be fairly confident the present and recent ministers can be trusted to keep that aspect above board.

I'm pretty confident in that too. Unfortunately, pretty confident is too low a bar after some of what we've seen in the past.

damienirel

bk wrote: »

Also there are far mores homes in rural Ireland today and they are far more dispersed then they were in the 40's. One off houses is a relatively new phenomenon enabled largely by the car. In the 40's most rural houses were clustered around villages, compared to our modern and much harder to service ribbon style development.
I'm not saying this will take 40 years, but it does show the scale of the job to be done.

Okay you make fair points, But I am making a point that we already have a phone network that covers rural Ireland? Eir own it - they know exactly what is involved in this rollout because they own this pre-existing copper network. I don't know how many years it took to rollout, I'm sure a lot less than the electricity.

damienirel

oscarBravo wrote: »

Have you ever been in charge of a massive project? Not on this scale necessarily, but one involving a large budget, lots of people, and several subcontractors?

It's not easy to estimate how long a project of this scale will take, especially when the first phase of the project involves hiring consultants (and being criticised for doing so) to tell you what the rest of the phases will involve.

Yeah I can only hope they are doing it right and making mistakes along the way because of the complexity. I do think Dennis Naughten is under pressure to get this right unlike the last gombeen Alex White.

murphaph

damienirel wrote: »

Okay you make fair points, But I am making a point that we already have a phone network that covers rural Ireland? Eir own it - they know exactly what is involved in this rollout because they own this pre-existing copper network. I don't know how many years it took to rollout, I'm sure a lot less than the electricity.

What? Why would you assume the copper telephone network took less time than the copper electricity network? I'd say they took roughly equal amounts of time to built.

I'm not even convinced Eir's shoddy pole infrastructure is an advantage for them. A much bigger advantage is the fibre that's been pushed into towns and villages for FTTC. This fibre will also serve as the backbone for the FTTH rollout in ribbon development areas. Siro don't have that depth of fibre.

bk

damienirel wrote: »

Okay you make fair points, But I am making a point that we already have a phone network that covers rural Ireland? Eir own it - they know exactly what is involved in this rollout because they own this pre-existing copper network. I don't know how many years it took to rollout, I'm sure a lot less than the electricity.

You have to remember that the copper phone network was also slowly built out over decades. When my parents moved into their house 40 years ago, it took them 2 years to get their phone line after they ordered it.

My parents house is smack bang in Cork City, just a couple of hundred meters from one of the largest exchanges in Ireland. And this wasn't unusual at all back then. By comparison can you imagine how long it took in rural Ireland.

jd

damienirel wrote: »

Yeah I can only hope they are doing it right and making mistakes along the way because of the complexity. I do think Dennis Naughten is under pressure to get this right unlike the last gombeen Alex White.

Not sure what your issue is with Alex White, Naughten is just continuing the process of getting the plan to tender. I think we'd be at the same point no matter who was minister.

KOR101

bk wrote: »

Irelands rural population really is very unique in Europe.

During the summer, I flew into Basel. Looking down from the plane really brought home the difference -virtually no one-off housing, and all the housing in clusters of twenty or thirty houses. Would it only be 'undeveloped' countries that have a similar pattern?

ED E

Not a fan of White but I'd have to argue that Naughten is the worse of the pair, promising way more than he can ever deliver.

KOR101 wrote: »

During the summer, I flew into Basel. Looking down from the plane really brought home the difference -virtually no one-off housing, and all the housing in clusters of twenty or thirty houses. Would it only be 'undeveloped' countries that have a similar pattern?

The vast majority of Europe got on with the sensible hamlet idea and clustered their homes. Some of Fennoscandia let themselves go and have "done an Ireland" on it but again they're the minority.

damienirel

bk wrote: »

You have to remember that the copper phone network was also slowly built out over decades. When my parents moved into their house 40 years ago, it took them 2 years to get their phone line after they ordered it.

My parents house is smack bang in Cork City, just a couple of hundred meters from one of the largest exchanges in Ireland. And this wasn't unusual at all back then. By comparison can you imagine how long it took in rural Ireland.

Yeah that is my worry that it will just be that a slowly evolving fibre network - like the old pots one, and I predict that's the way this will be. There doesn't seem to be any sense of urgency - just moaning about inherited problems of terrible planning and one off housing. We have a unique problem in that we have lots of rural one off housing therefore we need a tailored solution. i.e somebody has to take the wallet out and pay for the work that needs to be done. I would rather see my tax being spent on this than a lot of other things that the government decide to waste it on.

bk

damienirel wrote: »

Yeah that is my worry that it will just be that a slowly evolving fibre network - like the old pots one, and I predict that's the way this will be. There doesn't seem to be any sense of urgency - just moaning about inherited problems of terrible planning and one off housing. We have a unique problem in that we have lots of rural one off housing therefore we need a tailored solution. i.e somebody has to take the wallet out and pay for the work that needs to be done. I would rather see my tax being spent on this than a lot of other things that the government decide to waste it on.

The problem with that is that you will have the people of urban Ireland quite rightly ask why they should pay for the life style choices of people who decided to build one off houses in rural Ireland for a lot less and a lot bigger then those in urban Ireland.

If people decide to live in rural Ireland, should they not bear the real cost of such unsustainable living?

And this problem is not just broadband, that is just the tip of the iceberg. Hospitals, schools, road building and maintenance, policing, etc. all suffer because of the horrible mess we have made of rural Ireland.

Johnboy1951

bk wrote: »

The problem with that is that you will have the people of urban Ireland quite rightly ask why they should pay for the life style choices of people who decided to build one off houses in rural Ireland for a lot less and a lot bigger then those in urban Ireland.

If people decide to live in rural Ireland, should they not bear the real cost of such unsustainable living?

And this problem is not just broadband, that is just the tip of the iceberg. Hospitals, schools, road building and maintenance, policing, etc. all suffer because of the horrible mess we have made of rural Ireland.

Oh gosh, not that old drivel again!

MajesticDonkey

bk wrote: »

The problem with that is that you will have the people of urban Ireland quite rightly ask why they should pay for the life style choices of people who decided to build one off houses in rural Ireland for a lot less and a lot bigger then those in urban Ireland.

If people decide to live in rural Ireland, should they not bear the real cost of such unsustainable living?

And this problem is not just broadband, that is just the tip of the iceberg. Hospitals, schools, road building and maintenance, policing, etc. all suffer because of the horrible mess we have made of rural Ireland.

This is a completely separate topic, which clearly causes fairly heated debate most of the time it's brought up - do we need to go through it again?

murphaph

damienirel wrote: »

Yeah that is my worry that it will just be that a slowly evolving fibre network - like the old pots one, and I predict that's the way this will be. There doesn't seem to be any sense of urgency - just moaning about inherited problems of terrible planning and one off housing. We have a unique problem in that we have lots of rural one off housing therefore we need a tailored solution. i.e somebody has to take the wallet out and pay for the work that needs to be done. I would rather see my tax being spent on this than a lot of other things that the government decide to waste it on.

The taxes of those people set to benefit from this intervention won't come anywhere close to covering the cost. You really should be grateful that the NBP is happening at all.

Johnboy1951

murphaph wrote: »

The taxes of those people set to benefit from this intervention won't come anywhere close to covering the cost. You really should be grateful that the NBP is happening at all.

You are referring to the taxes on the service and content providers who will make the money from this for many years to come?

murphaph

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

You are referring to the taxes on the service and content providers who will make the money from this for many years to come?

You know what I'm referring to and you know perfectly well that to roll out ftth to rural one off housing requires massive subsidy. Let's just leave it at that.

legocrazy505

murphaph wrote: »

You know what I'm referring to and you know perfectly well that to roll out ftth to rural one-off housing requires massive subsidy. Let's just leave it at that.

Approx €250 million for an investment that will last 25 years, sure keep claiming it's "massive". Please if you want to start the same old bull**** that happens on other threads when broadband is discussed don't bother, please. I'm just about done with the whingers and people claiming this is a huge subsidy with little benefit. Ireland has one off housing yes we can all agree but it's irrelevant in this discussion. This is about the plan itself not about why Johnny lives in a one-off house.

digiman

legocrazy505 wrote: »

Approx €250 million for an investment that will last 25 years, sure keep claiming it's "massive". Please if you want to start the same old bull**** that happens on other threads when broadband is discussed don't bother, please. I'm just about done with the whingers and people claiming this is a huge subsidy with little benefit. Ireland has one off housing yes we can all agree but it's irrelevant in this discussion. This is about the plan itself not about why Johnny lives in a one-off house.

I would say you could multiply that figure by at least 5 to give FTTH to the whole of intervention area and you would probably still be short. Of course it's very unclear how much the government will subsidise this by.

I would highly doubt the project will come in on budget either. If the NBN in Australia is anything to go by it could be a lot more even. I can only imagine it's extremely difficult to put a cost on this especially for Enet and SIRO also to some extent. Eir are probably best positioned to give the most accurate cost.

rob808

digiman wrote: »

I would say you could multiply that figure by at least 5 to give FTTH to the whole of intervention area and you would probably still be short. Of course it's very unclear how much the government will subsidise this by.

I would highly doubt the project will come in on budget either. If the NBN in Australia is anything to go by it could be a lot more even. I can only imagine it's extremely difficult to put a cost on this especially for Enet and SIRO also to some extent. Eir are probably best positioned to give the most accurate cost.

I don't think realistically they do FTTH to the whole intervention area.The hard reach areas were it cost to much to deliver FTTH they use something else because part of the bidding process is how to reach them without it costing to much.

There no point in talking about Australian NBN they did it ass ways same with BT.

digiman

rob808 wrote: »

I don't think realistically they do FTTH to the whole intervention area.The hard reach areas were it cost to much to deliver FTTH they use something else because part of the bidding process is how to reach them without it costing to much.

There no point in talking about Australian NBN they did it ass ways same with BT.

In what way did they do it ass ways? Is there something our government can learn from them?

Hard to reach areas are going to be hard to reach with any technology, a one of house in the middle of nowhere will cost a huge amount with wireless so it could be just as well trying to serve it with fibre rather than building a tower site specifically for it.

Also do the winners just wait until the house in middle of nowhere wants broadband to sign up before they start to build to it. Like can you imagine some old age retired farmer in the middle of nowhere who has no interest in the internet and you build out telecoms infrastructure to it and then they never sign up, that would be a huge waste of money!

rob808

digiman wrote: »

In what way did they do it ass ways? Is there something our government can learn from them?

Hard to reach areas are going to be hard to reach with any technology, a one of house in the middle of nowhere will cost a huge amount with wireless so it could be just as well trying to serve it with fibre rather than building a tower site specifically for it.

Also do the winners just wait until the house in middle of nowhere wants broadband to sign up before they start to build to it. Like can you imagine some old age retired farmer in the middle of nowhere who has no interest in the internet and you build out telecoms infrastructure to it and then they never sign up, that would be a huge waste of money!

They were doing FTTH first then saw what BT were doing in uk with G.fast and change to that technology.I see what your saying but farmers need to go online now to do taxes so couldn't see them not using NBP network doh old people yes.It hard to say how NBP will go let hope it not a failure because we be waiting along time for another one.

digiman

rob808 wrote: »

They were doing FTTH first then saw what BT were doing in uk with G.fast and change to that technology.

But the main reason for this was because a new government came in and it was a very hot topic on how much it was costing and being over budget etc so the new government basically done a u-turn on the strategy the minute they got into office. As far as I know it's not even G-fast everywhere, they bought the existing cable networks and plan to upgrade them and also rolled out alot of VDSL as well.

BandMember

bk wrote: »

The problem with that is that you will have the people of urban Ireland quite rightly ask why they should pay for the life style choices of people who decided to build one off houses in rural Ireland for a lot less and a lot bigger then those in urban Ireland.

If people decide to live in rural Ireland, should they not bear the real cost of such unsustainable living?

And this problem is not just broadband, that is just the tip of the iceberg. Hospitals, schools, road building and maintenance, policing, etc. all suffer because of the horrible mess we have made of rural Ireland.

Oh for f...... Not again.... :rolleyes:

Right. Let's simplify this really quickly:
- some people choose to live in rural areas, they have their own reasons for doing so.
- some people choose to live in urban areas, they have their own reasons for doing so.
- neither issue is relevant to this thread.

So, can we not just all agree on that and, if people really want to debate those issues, start a different thread rather than keep rehashing the same points here?

That's my two cents anyway. :cool:

damienirel

murphaph wrote: »

You know what I'm referring to and you know perfectly well that to roll out ftth to rural one off housing requires massive subsidy. Let's just leave it at that.

Murphaph you always steer the debate on broadband onto one off housing, is there a council or planning authority thread you can jump on an whinge there thanks would be a lot more constructive!

daraghwal

murphaph wrote: »

You know what I'm referring to and you know perfectly well that to roll out ftth to rural one off housing requires massive subsidy. Let's just leave it at that.

Here you go murphaph. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057597381/22 Enjoy.

plodder

murphaph wrote: »

You know what I'm referring to and you know perfectly well that to roll out ftth to rural one off housing requires massive subsidy. Let's just leave it at that.

But, the economics have been revolutionised in the last year or two. Eir are delivering it to the first 300,000 completely unsubsidised.

murphaph

plodder wrote: »

But, the economics have been revolutionised in the last year or two. Eir are delivering it to the first 300,000 completely unsubsidised.

Then they'll be able to do the rest at such a small cost the individual home owners can pay for it themselves lol.

Eir are likely doing the 300k easier premises for strategic reasons tied to the NBP. If the NBP didn't exist then Eir probably wouldn't be rolling out ftth in those areas, but we'll never know for sure as Eir will never tell us.

Anyway, some posters here may like to separate settlement patterns from infrastructure provision, but to any sane person the two are clearly closely related.

rob808

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/fall-out-from-esat-digifone-haunts-broadband-bidding-process-1.2833187 now we know what cause the latest delay.

ItHurtsWhenIP

rob808 wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/fall-out-from-esat-digifone-haunts-broadband-bidding-process-1.2833187 now we know what cause the latest delay.

Already posted this morning here.

legocrazy505

murphaph wrote: »

Anyway, some posters here may like to separate settlement patterns from infrastructure provision, but to any sane person the two are clearly closely related.

Any sane person honestly is sick and tired of listening to the constant same argument against the NBP being trotted out as if it's some "aha got you!" argument.

People need to sit the **** down and just accept the fact one off housing is not something that will magically go away in Ireland. It's something the NBP has to overcome not get rid of. Even if rural Ireland were all neatly bundled major villages we'd still have ****ty broadband, the NBP would still have to happen. Eir and co have zero interest in delivering fibre speeds without a stick up their backsides when it comes to places outside of cities and major towns.

oscarBravo

legocrazy505 wrote: »

People need to sit the **** down and just accept the fact one off housing is not something that will magically go away in Ireland.

This.

If there was never another one-off house built in the country again - if it was compulsory for every single new build to be a high-rise in a city - we'd still have a massively dispersed population for the foreseeable future.

So, unless people are going to go down the forced-march starve-the-feckers-until-they-see-sense-and-go-live-in-a-city next-thing-they'll-want-running-water cul de sac, can we please keep the noise off this goddamn thread?

The NBP is happening. If you want to make a case for it not to happen, go talk to your TD. In the meantime, can we keep the thread for discussing it, rather than why people who don't need it would prefer if people who do need it didn't get it?

Thanks.

9726_9726

Ok, to change the channel here, cause yes, everyone is already paying for this indirectly through €5-7/m month price increases.....

Why are people banging on wanting "them to get started....", "Stop talking and roll it out already".

Do these people not realise that a project of this nature (unique in the world in the scale of its ambition) is *already* well underway?

Just because shovels are not in the ground doesn't mean it is not underway. The spec, the negotiations, the detailed network design which is being done by the three operators as we speak, so they can cost it and tender, the surveying, mapping, legal work, EU-level work, this is all necessary.

If a private company was rolling this out, most of it would be necessary. But this is state aid, needing to pass EU rules also. It's hugely complex and *well* underway already as a process.

Johnboy1951

rob808 wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/fall-out-from-esat-digifone-haunts-broadband-bidding-process-1.2833187 now we know what cause the latest delay.

I am guessing, but believe that those extra 170,000 additions to the NBP are mostly urban premises.
It appears they will have a noticeable effect of the cost of the NBP, as they would already have been connected if they were commercially viable.

That being the case there must be some very costly, and probably time consuming, works to be carried out in order to connect the majority of those premises.

For the overall cost of the NBP those 170,000 might add considerably more to the cost than taking the 300,000 eir 'blue line' connections out will save.

I also wonder how they will be dealt with ..... in parallel with the rural roll out or in series with it?
This could have an affect on the finishing date of the scheme also.

ItHurtsWhenIP

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I am guessing, but believe that those extra 170,000 additions to the NBP are mostly urban premises.
It appears they will have a noticeable effect of the cost of the NBP, as they would already have been connected if they were commercially viable.

That being the case there must be some very costly, and probably time consuming, works to be carried out in order to connect the majority of those premises.

For the overall cost of the NBP those 170,000 might add considerably more to the cost than taking the 300,000 eir 'blue line' connections out will save.

I also wonder how they will be dealt with ..... in parallel with the rural roll out or in series with it?
This could have an affect on the finishing date of the scheme also.

Had somebody not established that these 170,000 were those homes that were presently getting a commercial eVDSL/VDSL, but whose profiles were below the NBP standard and therefore had to be pulled into the NBP? Therefore they would have been in a reasonably well serviced area, so may not be too expensive to give FTTH to.

pegasus1

bk wrote: »

People talk about FTTH in Sweden, Norway, etc. But personally having hiked all over these lovely countries, I can assure you that 1 or 2km outside cities and towns there simply are no houses at all. I would often pass little hamlets of 3 or 4 houses in the countryside, all boarded up! Their populations have all moved to the cities and towns. That makes FTTH much easier.

Irelands rural population really is very unique in Europe.

Hmmm. Might have to call you out on that one..Sweden where I was at my sisters wedding up in the hills surrounded by forests, dirt roads, trucks passing by loaded with timber, Moose walking onto the road right in front of us. the wedding was at my brother in laws grandparents house, which is still occupied..So yes there are still totally ruarl houses/farms in sweden..My sister ran a stables for a while at a house in the middle of the country, plenty of hamlets still exist..

Gonzo

Ive seen some fairly rural housing in southern Spain away from the very populated coastline. However, the majority of housing in spain is centered around towns and villages, however there can be some ribbon development style housing edging out of towns, it would not be nearly as extensive as the networks of ribbon developments in Ireland.

ItHurtsWhenIP

pegasus1 wrote: »

Hmmm. Might have to call you out on that one..Sweden where I was at my sisters wedding up in the hills surrounded by forests, dirt roads, trucks passing by loaded with timber, Moose walking onto the road right in front of us. the wedding was at my brother in laws grandparents house, which is still occupied..So yes there are still totally ruarl houses/farms in sweden..My sister ran a stables for a while at a house in the middle of the country, plenty of hamlets still exist..

Gonzo wrote: »

Ive seen some fairly rural housing in southern Spain away from the very populated coastline. However, the majority of housing in spain is centered around towns and villages, however there can be some ribbon development style housing edging out of towns, it would not be nearly as extensive as the networks of ribbon developments in Ireland.

Folks - can we please keep this thread on track as it had been for the previous 3 posts. I want to read about NBP related matters, not how the Irish population is dispersed (we know it is) and how other countries do rural housing. It's not relevant here.

damienirel

ItHurtsWhenIP wrote: »

Folks - can we please keep this thread on track as it had been for the previous 3 posts. I want to read about NBP related matters, not how the Irish population is dispersed (we know it is) and how other countries do rural housing. It's not relevant here.

Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in!:D

murphaph

ItHurtsWhenIP wrote: »

Folks - can we please keep this thread on track as it had been for the previous 3 posts. I want to read about NBP related matters, not how the Irish population is dispersed (we know it is) and how other countries do rural housing. It's not relevant here.

It's relevant when some posters start stamping their virtual feet bemoaning the "slow" pace of the NBP and demanding that the project be finished in 18 months. These individuals have clearly forgotten that the dispersed nature of how they live is why it's difficult to get decent broadband to them.

I also note that neither I nor bk (nor anyone else that I could see) stated that the NBP should not go ahead (even though it requires huge cross subsidy from urban tax payers), but even the mere mentioning of the realities of the situation draws a strange kind of hysterical response in which anyone who reminds one off dwellers that their lifestyle choice made it difficult to get decent broadband is accused of trying to force everyone to live in a tower block in Dublin. If only all the one offs (retaining their site areas) had just been clustered together instead of in long ribbons with a couple of hundred metres between properties, they'd more or less ALL have vectored VDSL already and there'd be plenty of time to slowly upgrade the network to FTTH (which is long term the only technology in town for telecoms in the future, urban or rural).

The posters who constantly moan about the timelines are just as tiresome to me as I am to those who don't like being reminded that one off housing is hard to supply with infrastructure!

ItHurtsWhenIP

murphaph wrote: »

It's relevant when some posters start stamping their virtual feet bemoaning the "slow" pace of the NBP and demanding that the project be finished in 18 months. These individuals have clearly forgotten that the dispersed nature of how they live is why it's difficult to get decent broadband to them.

I also note that neither I nor bk (nor anyone else that I could see) stated that the NBP should not go ahead (even though it requires huge cross subsidy from urban tax payers), but even the mere mentioning of the realities of the situation draws a strange kind of hysterical response in which anyone who reminds one off dwellers that their lifestyle choice made it difficult to get decent broadband is accused of trying to force everyone to live in a tower block in Dublin. If only all the one offs (retaining their site areas) had just been clustered together instead of in long ribbons with a couple of hundred metres between properties, they'd more or less ALL have vectored VDSL already and there'd be plenty of time to slowly upgrade the network to FTTH (which is long term the only technology in town for telecoms in the future, urban or rural).

The posters who constantly moan about the timelines are just as tiresome to me as I am to those who don't like being reminded that one off housing is hard to supply with infrastructure!

Jesus ... OK ... can we have new ground rules ...

1. No more "urban good, rural bad"
2. No more "they do it way better in Imaginaryland"
3. No more "hurry the fcuk up my boreen already"

PLEASE????
;):D

damienirel

9726_9726 wrote: »

Ok, to change the channel here, cause yes, everyone is already paying for this indirectly through €5-7/m month price increases.....

Why are people banging on wanting "them to get started....", "Stop talking and roll it out already".

Do these people not realise that a project of this nature (unique in the world in the scale of its ambition) is *already* well underway?

Just because shovels are not in the ground doesn't mean it is not underway. The spec, the negotiations, the detailed network design which is being done by the three operators as we speak, so they can cost it and tender, the surveying, mapping, legal work, EU-level work, this is all necessary.

If a private company was rolling this out, most of it would be necessary. But this is state aid, needing to pass EU rules also. It's hugely complex and *well* underway already as a process.

Okay I'll explain why people are "banging on wanting "them to get started....""
Have a good read of this...
http://irelandoffline.org/2016/10/irelandofflines-nbp-delay-primer/

Don't be so patronising - explaining how complex the whole process is, there are a lot of people in this country waiting for a basic level of internet access never mind 1gbps speed. A lot of hard working tax paying people who find it hard in todays world to operate businesses, communicate, bank, pay bills etc.
The reality is the complexities were always there - nothing has changed. It's not as if the country doubled in size overnight. Same problems - different deadlines - hence the moaning!

murphaph

ItHurtsWhenIP wrote: »

Jesus ... OK ... can we have new ground rules ...

1. No more "urban good, rural bad"
2. No more "they do it way better in Imaginaryland"
3. No more "hurry the fcuk up my boreen already"

Works for me.

damienirel

Yerman's having a laugh at the IFA - pretty funny statement though...
http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/enet-boss-says-farmers-for-eir-a-case-of-premature-articulation-35144536.html

rob808

damienirel wrote: »

Yerman's having a laugh at the IFA - pretty funny statement though...
http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/enet-boss-says-farmers-for-eir-a-case-of-premature-articulation-35144536.html

Enet worries me if they win a contract they probably cheap out and only use half FTTH and rest wireless.

MajesticDonkey

rob808 wrote: »

Enet worries me if they win a contract they probably cheap out and only use half FTTH and rest wireless.

You seem to completely ignore the fact that's mentioned here time and time again that a wireless rollout is not necessarily easier or cheaper than an FTTH rollout - most likely the opposite in fact.

damienirel

rob808 wrote: »

Enet worries me if they win a contract they probably cheap out and only use half FTTH and rest wireless.

Enet could easily win it - I'm not sure if I'd be any more worried.
All of them hope to make a quick buck not doubt in my mind about that.

marno21

damienirel wrote: »

Enet could easily win it - I'm not sure if I'd be any more worried.
All of them hope to make a quick buck not doubt in my mind about that.

Easier for eir to make a quick buck due to the extensiveness of their existing network - a lot less rolling out to do.

damienirel

marno21 wrote: »

Easier for eir to make a quick buck due to the extensiveness of their existing network - a lot less rolling out to do.

Have to totally agree with that!

rob808

marno21 wrote: »

Easier for eir to make a quick buck due to the extensiveness of their existing network - a lot less rolling out to do.

All fairness to Eir they deserve to win a contract for the NBP,looking at Enet FTTH pilot with only 350 homes and took them nine months.Then compare that to Eir 300,000 while it not complete till end of 2018 it clear eir the best company to go with for NBP.

oscarBravo

It's not a popularity contest. The contracts will be awarded on the basis of an exhaustive evaluation of the proposals submitted by the bidders.