The Register: All of Scotland to get broadband

damien

http://www.theregister.com/2005/04/25/scotland_broadband/

Every community in Scotland will be hooked up to affordable broadband by the end of 2005 following a £30m deal between the Scottish Executive and dominant UK telco BT.

As part of the deal BT - which is stumping up around half of the cash - will convert 378 exchanges giving 51,000 households and 5,400 businesses access to broadband. A further 21 exchanges in the Western Isles are being broadband-enabled via a publicly-funded wireless broadband project.
Click Here

Without the cash these commercially unviable exchanges would not have supported enough end users to justify the investment.

Announcing the deal Enterprise Minister Jim Wallace said that the Scottish Executive was "stepping in" to help provide broadband where the commercial market won't deliver.

"We made a commitment in our Partnership Agreement to ensure that every community in Scotland has access to broadband by the end of 2005," he said. "We are now well on the way to delivering on this.

"We have made it clear again and again that economic growth is our top priority. By providing access to broadband technology in Scotland and the huge benefits it brings, we are putting in place an important business and educational tool to facilitate economic growth in every community."

In February, Northern Ireland claimed to have achieved 100 per cent broadband coverage after public sector cash was chucked at BT to help wire-up commercially unviable exchanges.

seamus

The day is coming for the UK where basic telephone provision includes broadband internet by default (because the phone services are run over it).

We'll be 10 years or so behind, no doubt.

Capt'n Midnight

Hang on - is £30m the half cost or the full cost ?

So at the worst case €100m would get BB to a country with a similar population..

damien

This seems to be to be the areas where BT wouldn't install equipment as it wasn't viable.

I wonder will all those exchanges be made available too for those that want to carry out LLU ? It would only seem fair.

dahamsta

So should Gov.ie give a chunk of change to Eircom to do the same in Ireland. I'll set aside my opinion for a little while...

adam

Urban Weigl

dahamsta wrote:

So should Gov.ie give a chunk of change to Eircom to do the same in Ireland. I'll set aside my opinion for a little while...

Bit late to ask about that, isn't it? After all, they're already getting money under the GBS, and applying for many more towns in the second phase.

Moriarty

There's a rather large difference between piecemeal GBS-funded upgrading and a nationwide upgrade.

dahamsta

What he said.

DonegalMan

Moriarty wrote:

There's a rather large difference between piecemeal GBS-funded upgrading and a nationwide upgrade.

And I can't help wondering if piecemeal GBS-funding plus the MANS will end up costing more than a nationwide upgrade but will be significantly less effective.

That would be a typical "Irish solution to an Irish problem"

ednwireland

yep and i'm sitting here 18 months after an exchange has been upgraded still unable to get broadband. to tell you the truth its pathetic. not when uk exchanges are supposed to move to 8mb as their base provision by year end.

Mr_Man

While it may be more cost effective to give Eircom the money to pursue a similar scheme as BT have carried out up North, and now in Scotland there are a few things which need to be done first.

1) Eircom need to invest to upgrade their network to remove pairgains and replace worn copper so that all subscribers are truely able to take advantage of the upgrade of all exchanges. Having 1 person in 5 unable to get the service will exclude a lot of people and this should not be permitted if the Government are funding a truely nationwide rollout.

2) Eircom need to accept and not hinder the LLU process. While they may be the only entity capable of providing nationwide coverage it should not exclude competition through LLU. They need to stop the messing.

3) Comreg need to be abolished/reformed to ensure proper regulation; a similar reigme to Oftel, in the UK, needs to be put in place to stop Eircom abusing its dominant position.

4) Eircom should be required to give legally binding commitments regarding the amount of investment they will make in maintaining the network. If they get a chunk of moneyto upgrade the Government needs safeguards to ensure that their investment will not be allowed to rot away due to lack of maintainance.

Just my 2c

M.

eircomtribunal

I can sense a certain negativity towards Ireland in your posts. You have to stop taking your "information" about the broadband coverage situation from dubious sources like IOFFL, ComWreck or the OECD.

Our broadband coverage is fine:

DSL coverage in Ireland is currently around 80%.

(ComReg: "Forward-looking Strategic Review of the Irish Telecom's sector" 5th April 2005)
ComReg go on to state that by March 2006 Eircom will roll out dsl to exchanges covering 90% of population.
What's with lines that fail? Don't worry. Isolde has thought of that:

alternative broadband technologies such as wireless and satellite can fill this broadband gap. To this end ComReg has issued Fixed Wireless Access Local Area licences.

Secondly. Have you not seen Eircom's reassuring ads in the Sunday Times?
100% Satellite Broadband coverage is at hand for anybody. And it's dirt cheap: "50% cheaper" then before. And you can even migrate from other providers (!).

P.

jwt

dahamsta wrote:

So should Gov.ie give a chunk of change to Eircom to do the same in Ireland. I'll set aside my opinion for a little while...

adam

I think it'll happen by default, when the GBS runs out and there is money left over



John

Sponge Bob

I did say it could be kinda done for €70m (700 remaining exchanges X €100,000) ...max.... but not if 50% of rural lines will fail anyway as that is a shocking waste of taxpayers money .

Were it max 15% of rural lines on any one single exchange as an SLA I could countenance it. They will not be up to that high standard for years , 2012 is the latest plan . GBS must provide till then .

We could try 1 county 1st so schtep up dere lads.

Blaster99

The good thing with GBS (and MANs) is that they create competition, it's just not handing money over to Eircom. Even if that costs more than giving the money to Eircom I think we will be better off in the long run with that. And if Eircom's rural network is as bad as you guys make out, then it makes even more sense to invest in alternate delivery mechanisms/technologies.

Urban Weigl

Blaster99 wrote:

And if Eircom's rural network is as bad as you guys make out, then it makes even more sense to invest in alternate delivery mechanisms/technologies.

The MAN's are an alternative delivery mechanism for rural areas? And I was thinking that they weren't even an alternative delivery mechanism for urban areas.

What I am waiting for someone to figure out is what part of the puzzle they represent, and how they can be used. It seems like the government doesn't really know the answer to that either.

I do agree with you that we shouldn't be throwing more money at Eircom, though. I just don't see how the MAN's are delivering value for money, or even representing a solution.

eircomtribunal

Blaster99 wrote:

The good thing with GBS .. is that they create competition, it's just not handing money over to Eircom. Even if that costs more than giving the money to Eircom I think we will be better off in the long run with that.

Consider this: You'll soon see that Eircom are increasingly taking part in the Group Broadband Scheme. That means: Eircom will take the GBS money to dsl enable smaller exchanges (a strong disincentive for Eircom to enable more exchanges on their own accord!) and do nothing about the line failure, as the GBS does not stipulate 100 pop coverage in the area.

P.

Blaster99

I suppose I was referring more to wireless last mile than MAN's with that statement. I'm not an expert on this stuff, far from it, but the purpose of the MAN's is to deliver alternative backhaul. I can't see how that could be a bad thing. Smart is certainly using the MAN's to do their LLU roll-out and I'm sure a lot of the 3.5Ghz operators will use them too.

I could be wrong, but I would think that if Eircom enables an exchange, that provides more "coverage" than a wireless operator can usually provide and the QoS will be better and you get access to resellers. And realistically Eircom tends to be better value than a lot of the regional wireless ISP's because Eircom's pricing is essentially targetting Dublin. So if Eircom thinks it's worth doing then that's not necessarily a bad thing. But the main thing is that there's competition for the grant.

Sponge Bob

Blaster99 wrote:

I could be wrong, but I would think that if Eircom enables an exchange, that provides more "coverage" than a wireless operator can usually provide

I think not if the line failure rate on yet to be enabled exchanges is in the order of 50% and Comreg know that which is why they refuse to release the data on an FoI request in what they think is the National Interest . How does 50% guaranteed NON coverage = more coverage than wireless ???

So if Eircom thinks it's worth doing then that's not necessarily a bad thing. But the main thing is that there's competition for the grant.

Eircom have set a marker of €100k to DSL enable an exchange with 2 or more GBS schemes giving them this, Oughterard ion Galway and somewhere in Cork if not more.

I do not agree with the government getting involved centrally in a willy nilly subsidy because of the horrendous line failure rates on rural exchange. If the government also get a base SLA limiting the failure rate to no more than 15% of lines within 5km of the exchange on day one that may be different .... but if DSL is what the community actually decides they want in a GBS then I am not against it.

The Udarás paid about the €100k for a number of rural exchanges in Gaeltacht areas, the effect in some communities has been felt already . €100k would not pay to widen a crossroads so that a school bus could turn there nowadays whereas it can act as a catalyst for job creation and retention . Therefore it is not a ridulous use of public money.

There are 700 exchanges yet to be DSL enabled (as in not done or in an already announced upgrade program) = 700 x €100k or €70m but I would expect Eircom to do every exchange where the pop is over 1000 and maybe get grant aided for the rest where they guarantee 85% pass on day one.

To put it in perspective €70m would be the cost of bypassing somewhere the size of Abbeyleix with a motorway . DSL enabling exchanges with some 400,000 lines could cut out 20,000 NET car journeys as people drive to where the BB is. 20,000 cars per days is nominal for a 2 lane motorway so the net cost is kinda feck all to the state albeit dissipated nationally .

There are exchanges in rural Ireland where 100% of lines WILL FAIL so what is the point in spending €100k on them at this time, lets give those people the line rental rebate of 80% that they are entitled to instead . If Eircom want that DSL subsidy (and they do) then we rural dwellers want the proper copper that we pay a global premium for in our line rental or else reduce the cost to what we are getting for our money .

I think the above is a fairly equitable solution to all the stakeholders involved , could we maybe start with a limited program for Leitrim or Offaly first and see how that goes before the government flashes the cash at the Rat.

Blaster99

Eircom got €100k to enable an exchange through a GBS? I think not. The grants aren't anywhere near that. If I recall you made the point some time ago that Eircom got €100k per exchange from that Gaelic language/culture organisation to enable a couple of exchanges, whereas they enabled a couple of exchanges as part of a GBS for a lot less than that hence €100k wasn't fair market value but the kinds of money Eircom get when there's no competition. So I think my point about GBS leading to competition being a good thing is more than justified.

I'm not gonna get into one of these statistical battles about coverage. Ultimately you don't know what the line failure rate is and neither do I. If the local community wants ADSL then I think it has quite a few things going for it.

Mr_Man

If Eircom are the ISP partners in a GBS then people within range of the exchange, and whose copper is up to scratch will benefit. Those who are outside the range, or whose copper is not up to scratch are left up the creek without a paddle.

By giving Eircom the GBS money it means that it makes it very unlikely that a WISP will ever be interested in the remaining subscribers. To paraphrase Mr Spock "Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?"

M.

Sponge Bob

Blaster99 wrote:

Eircom got €100k to enable an exchange through a GBS? I think not. The grants aren't anywhere near that. If I recall you made the point some time ago that Eircom got €100k per exchange from that Gaelic language/culture organisation to enable a couple of exchanges, whereas they enabled a couple of exchanges as part of a GBS for a lot less than that hence €100k wasn't fair market value but the kinds of money Eircom get when there's no competition. So I think my point about GBS leading to competition being a good thing is more than justified.

Read this then, 7 Exchanges Were DSL Enabled Through GBS to date

My wording was that Eircom will DSL enable an exchange for €100k, the GBS would fund about 50% of that 100k leaving local business etc to supply the rest of the money. A few leased line customers funding their local GBS would be enough to raise that €50k . HEY PWESTO , DSL

I'm not gonna get into one of these statistical battles about coverage. Ultimately you don't know what the line failure rate is and neither do I.

All I know is what the Cabinet have been collectively told by Eircom and by Comreg . Why would anyone lie to Bertie ? Some of those failures will come down to pure distance from exchange of course but 50% of lines will fail in rural exchanges , being exchanges which do not serve a town with a pupulation over 1500 . Fact . If the figure is wrong then its because Eircom were lying to the government to get a higher subsidy off them for line maintenance ...as if line rental is not enough

If 50% of lines fail an ADSL test then the coverage CAN NOT EXCEED 50% can it ??????

Blaster99

Sponge Bob wrote:

Read this then, 7 Exchanges Were DSL Enabled Through GBS to date

My wording was that Eircom will DSL enable an exchange for €100k, the GBS would fund about 50% of that 100k leaving local business etc to supply the rest of the money. A few leased line customers funding their local GBS would be enough to raise that €50k . HEY PWESTO , DSL

Where/when has Eircom gotten €100k *as part of a GBS* to enable an exchange?

LFCFan

why should 100% funding be provided for financially unviable exchanges? Surely there's a level at which a certain amount of investment would still give a return to Eircom? eg. If it costs 100K to enable an exchange but Eircom would only get a ROI of 50% of this, then should the funding only need to be 50% of the cost of upgrading, if ya get my meaning???

Sponge Bob

Blaster99 wrote:

Where/when has Eircom gotten €100k *as part of a GBS* to enable an exchange?

Oughterard ..I suspect.. and were it asked !!!!

Blaster99 wrote:

Where/when has Eircom gotten €100k to enable an exchange?

The Udaras scheme incl Kilcar, Carna, Carraroe, Belmullet and others.

Blaster99

You've mentioned the Udaras scheme before, but that's not GBS. That's Eircom taking the piss because there was soft Government money available.

The money involved in those Eircom supported GBS's was posted here before and it sure as hell wasn't €100k. Simply because the grants aren't anywhere near that. Can we move on now?

Sponge Bob

The Scottish plan is essentially universal DSL . GBS is a precursor and complement to that here . I tried to cost a la Scotland and came up with €70m tops ....and with caveats at that such as 85% pass on day one .

Do you doubt the 50% fail rate on rural exchanges ?

the_syco

damien.m wrote:

This seems to be to be the areas where BT wouldn't install equipment as it wasn't viable.

This sounds like an Eircom excuse, tbh.