PDA

View Full Version : Unbundling of the local loop



sAsLEX
3rd May 2006, 19:12
How come there aint any threads over this already?

Telecoms days of monopoly are over http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3656403a10,00.html

Whynot
3rd May 2006, 19:14
:drinknsin :woohoo: :woohoo:

the great day has come finally:yes:

Storm
3rd May 2006, 19:19
Firstly halle f'in lujah, the bitch is dead
Secondly your thread title is a bit bland- Telecom can suck my big one would have gone down better I feel :P
I like the way the govt decided in the morning and telescum knew by mid afternoon. Spose thier lobbying guys couldnt stop it this time (not enough bribes to the right minister I reckon) but they could still squeal to the bosses

Be interesting to watch the stocks plummet like the Titanic tomorrow when the stockmarket opens- its already lost 33pts in the aussie market. The Slingshot/Ihug guys etc will be in very late tomorow on account of the massive hangovers from tonight :):)

sAsLEX
3rd May 2006, 19:27
Firstly halle f'in lujah, the bitch is dead
Secondly your thread title is a bit bland- Telecom can suck my big one would have gone down better I feel :P

cow poos prob wont understand this title so hopefully the thread will stay on track for a bit.

Very interesting how Telescum found out the info so fast.

DemonWolf
3rd May 2006, 19:33
about bloody time too! now maybe we'll not get so arse raped over pricing and packages!

Storm
3rd May 2006, 19:34
Well, when you have had a 700million odd profit for who knows how many years, you can afford to "tip" a little here and there into the pockets of those secretary types who are in the background at these govt meetings
PS I see your point re cowpoos, I retract my earlier comment

Fatjim
3rd May 2006, 19:45
Don't be alarmed, but I don't think this'll make too much difference. Telecom WILL price the competition out of the market. They don't have to fund the investment like their competition will.

sAsLEX
3rd May 2006, 19:47
Don't be alarmed, but I don't think this'll make too much difference. Telecom WILL price the competition out of the market. They don't have to fund the investment like their competition will.

Includes clauses to prevent a monopoly playing others out of the market according to the boffin on the tv

mdb
3rd May 2006, 19:48
Don't get too excited yet ... In England they unbundled the local loop and some people ended up waiting months for services. Everyone was blaming everyone else (usually BT), and they were saying it was nothing to do with them, blah blah.

Best idea is for wireless technologies to be developed further. If we had a 3rd player in the wireless market (Telstra build something!), then mobiles should cost less and you wouldn't have to worry about local loops.

sAsLEX
3rd May 2006, 19:49
Best idea is for wireless technologies to be developed further. If we had a 3rd player in the wireless market (Telstra build something!), then mobiles should cost less and you wouldn't have to worry about local loops.

Who are the two you are reffering to? I am on wireless with Iconz, and theres whoosh pretty sure some others about as well.

802.16 or WiMAX whould provide a cheaper and nearly as fast alternative to the wired access that telecom has had control over, in fact this is being rolled out for rurla and sparsley pop areas already in NZ

RantyDave
3rd May 2006, 19:51
The cabinet had been planning to force Telecom to unbundle - they were going to announce it as part of the budget. Finally. However some soon-to-be-unemployed halfwit felt fit to leak the papers to beloved Telescum themselves.

So the "part of the budget" bit was scrapped and got turned into "right now".

http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3656403a10,00.html

Wiping THREE QUARTERS OF A BILLION DOLLARS off their market capitalisation. The rest will have to wait until the markets open here.

So, if you're one of the smug cnuts with Telecom shares I'd like to say "haa haa" and suggest that you might be wanting to sell that beemer about now.

Dave

Whynot
3rd May 2006, 19:56
umm

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=28757

WINJA
3rd May 2006, 19:57
fucken telecom arseholes , its about time

RantyDave
3rd May 2006, 19:59
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=28757
Damn. Sorry.

Dave

Ixion
3rd May 2006, 20:04
I'll believe that snake is scotched when I see it filletted.

Telecom will tie this up for decades in the courts. Even if (which I doubt) the gubbermint goes through with it. This capitalist government is bought and sold to the likes of Telecom, the dog won't turn on its master.

Interesting though, that the markets value the monopoly at $750million. Even at a 20:1 multiplier that makes nearly $40 million a year that Telecom having been gouging the oublic for.

diggydog
3rd May 2006, 20:05
they tell u they speed the net it up & make it cheaper, but telecom bloody ripen us off.
we need competition to bring prices down, so bring it on :angry:

TwoSeven
3rd May 2006, 20:13
Now all we have to do is talk the local councels into putting up a free WiMax mesh networks across each city like they are starting to do overseas.

Free broadband would be even better.

cowpoos
3rd May 2006, 20:13
cow poos prob wont understand this title so hopefully the thread will stay on track for a bit.

Very interesting how Telescum found out the info so fast.
you thought wrong laddie.....and anyway.....this basically means I will never beable to get broadband as its not economical for any company to do so...which is a fuckin cunt....unless wholesale data becomes cheaper and then i will get satilite or whoosh wireless becomes avalible in southern wairarapa.....

Paul in NZ
3rd May 2006, 20:24
I have a funny feeling this is going to work the opposite way than most people think.

It costs a shite load of money to introduce new services and since at one time or another I have held the life blood of every exchange telecom own in my hands, I'd say be very careful... I have no great feelings either way towards em but I have seen the competition and i tell you what, Telecom don't look too bad in comparison!

Cheaper faster broadband? Stuffed if I'd put my money in it. ...

boomer
3rd May 2006, 20:25
heres another player.. mobile broadband...here (http://www.vodafone.co.nz/promos/1gbfor49/1gbfor49.jsp)

big fat finger to teleskum:wait:

Jantar
3rd May 2006, 20:30
you thought wrong laddie.....and anyway.....this basically means I will never beable to get broadband as its not economical for any company to do so...which is a fuckin cunt....unless wholesale data becomes cheaper and then i will get satilite or whoosh wireless becomes avalible in southern wairarapa.....

Same here, Hell I'd like any broadband, but now it looks like wireless will be the only way us rural users will ever see it. Unfortunately the price of wireless broadband is too prohibitive.

Mental Trousers
3rd May 2006, 20:34
I like the way the govt decided in the morning and telescum knew by mid afternoon.

As the legislation directly affects Telecom the government would've notified them before making it public.

bugjuice
3rd May 2006, 20:35
Best idea is for wireless technologies to be developed further. If we had a 3rd player in the wireless market (Telstra build something!), then mobiles should cost less and you wouldn't have to worry about local loops.
TCL has a wireless local loop already, and is being used by quite a few big companies. We've got a fuck-off big transmitter on the ASB tower in the city.. But its cost of all the equipment, plus the wires running to it mean that at the moment, residential access isn't financially viable at the moment.

First I heard of it was the news at 6, so I'm betting a few of my colleagues are still at work now.. I guess I'll see the true ramifications of all this tomorrow

but at long last, the empire will crumble in little bits.

I'm just a bit annoyed at how hung up everyone is about broadband uptake etc.. LLU is more than just broadband, it's tolls, services (voice mail, call waiting, etc), cell phone calls, price overall etc etc.. more than just bloody internet..

sAsLEX
3rd May 2006, 20:38
heres another player.. mobile broadband...here (http://www.vodafone.co.nz/promos/1gbfor49/1gbfor49.jsp)

big fat finger to teleskum:wait:
3G is poos, and aint being introduced as much as WiMAX and ETSI HiperMAN (European) and WiBro (Korean).


Same here, Hell I'd like any broadband, but now it looks like wireless will be the only way us rural users will ever see it. Unfortunately the price of wireless broadband is too prohibitive.

Uncapped at 55 a month here on wireless sonny.

bugjuice
3rd May 2006, 20:41
Telecom 3G is bollocks. Big hairy smoke n mirrors bollocks.
When they first launched it, it wasn't even on the 3G network! And half the things they boast like video messaging (not live talking, but sending a message), 2.5G has been able to do that for yonks.. nothing new there..
Just smoke n mirrors and big bollocks, cos they wanted to be the first on the market with it..

So far, TCL won't launch a cell phone network, cos it costs millions to build something decent. Voda and TC wanted so much money for use of theirs (at a limited choice too), that it wasn't worth it. This LLU decision might have more cookies to it like opening up the cell phone market too..

Brian d marge
3rd May 2006, 20:42
does that mean I can watch me internet telly when I go on hols Yippeee

Bye telescum

Have a nicedayt , thanks for comming saionara .....TTFN

Stephen

Blackbird
3rd May 2006, 20:43
.

So, if you're one of the smug cnuts with Telecom shares I'd like to say "haa haa" and suggest that you might be wanting to sell that beemer about now.

Dave

I know Telecom are crap, but they are still a good investment and will bounce back. Crikey, if we were worried about getting shares in ethical companies, the share market would be miniscule.

Milky
3rd May 2006, 20:46
haha... That is too true buggy, I know a guy working at vodafone who was pissed off at them touting it as the latest 3g tech when most of it is still on the old networks.

Be very interesting to see what happens to the local sharemarket tomorrow - telecom is something like 45% by value traded each day, not sure on the market capitalisation thing, but the impact is likely to be real big.

Jantar
3rd May 2006, 20:47
Uncapped at 55 a month here on wireless sonny.

Maybe in Albany, but try rural Central Otago.

Hitcher
3rd May 2006, 20:49
"Unbundling" an obsolete, clapped-out copper-wire network? Woo Hoo!

From a climate where a monopoly grudgingly invested in it to a Brave New World where there is no incentive for anybody to invest in and upgrade it. Welcome to the People's Republic of Aotearoa. Has anybody got a Morse key or a Telex?

sAsLEX
3rd May 2006, 20:49
Telecom 3G is bollocks.
Just smoke n mirrors and big bollocks, cos they wanted to be the first on the market with it..

Just like their recent upgrade! ha Like uprgading from a ltr sports bike to an anemic 1.3 car and saying but look you have more cc's


Oh and 3g in general aint that popular and uptake in places where it counts like Europe et al aint that big, WiMAX on the other hand is slated as the next Wi-Fi with Intel putting its hand in its pocket to develop a wi-fi/wiMAX chip, dont see many 3g ready lap tops on the market do you?!>

bugjuice
3rd May 2006, 20:50
give it 10 years, Hitcher, then it might be half decent here.. ;)

sAsLEX
3rd May 2006, 20:51
Maybe in Albany, but try rural Central Otago.

http://www.intel.com/netcomms/technologies/wimax/experiences.htm

bottom example mate

EDIT and clicky http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5&ObjectID=10363291

Hitcher
3rd May 2006, 20:52
I know Telecom are crap, but they are still a good investment and will bounce back. Crikey, if we were worried about getting shares in ethical companies, the share market would be miniscule.
Telecom is just a utility company. Utilities are never "star" performers in terms of their shares. The only reason it rates in New Zealand is that it our largest publicly listed company and dominates the whole NZX (such that that is), and has received priviledged regulatory treatment from successive governments since it was corporatised.

bugjuice
3rd May 2006, 20:52
Oh and 3g in general aint that popular and uptake in places where it counts like Europe et al aint that big, WiMAX on the other hand is slated as the next Wi-Fi with Intel putting its hand in its pocket to develop a wi-fi/wiMAX chip, dont see many 3g ready lap tops on the market do you?!>
I read in this months' NetGuide, that WiMax is capable of being accessed up to 50kms from tower to tower. By comparison, Wi-Fi 'g' is good for 100m.

bring on commercial WiMax I reckon..

sAsLEX
3rd May 2006, 21:06
I read in this months' NetGuide, that WiMax is capable of being accessed up to 50kms from tower to tower. By comparison, Wi-Fi 'g' is good for 100m.

bring on commercial WiMax I reckon..

yes but only in the Line Of Sight configuration for static users. It is cool, but 802.16e a wimax part will allow mobile access at vehicular speeds!

The high ranges are only for static like roof top attenas and then a different part of WiMAX is used to get to the modem on your desk, or in you lap top, just did a 15 page report on it so have a fair idea on it.

What will end up happening is Wi-Fi will remain the standard for hotspots etc its just that the service to these will be provided by WiMAX

Insanity_rules
3rd May 2006, 21:06
heres another player.. mobile broadband...here (http://www.vodafone.co.nz/promos/1gbfor49/1gbfor49.jsp)

big fat finger to teleskum:wait:

Hate to burst your bubble here, I'm also a telescum hater. A lot of my clients have tried 3G data and the coverage seriously sux. It keeps cutting down to GPRS speed and thats slooooooow.
Funny was I had a client in Miramar (Peter Jacksonville) who lived right near a LARGE bill board for 3G and couldnt even get a 3G signal.

Good price but they really need to increase the coverage.

I've been in the industry for about 10+ years and seen a lot come and go. The main problems with new players are the fact that there aren't enough population wize to make them fly! The investment in backbone is too great given our geographic spread and topography.

Telstra has seriously pulled back as they arent making money out of us and telescum while their customer service sux and their technology is OLD, it tends to work more reliably than in most places in the world. Large parts of the US for example get crappy mobile coverage in major metro areas and it takes nearly a month to get a new land line on.

Unbundling the local loop on this current proposal will probably have a degrading effect on the infrastructure as the proposed fees for new carriers dont allow enough money to keep investing what telescum does currently in maintenance of the network. Although it sux we need a interconnection agreement that works but its a catch 22.

sAsLEX
3rd May 2006, 21:09
bring on commercial WiMax I reckon..

The technology for WiMAX is actually the IEEE standard 802.16 and is in use round the world for wireless apps, only thing it is proprietary, ie one companies things dont work with another (unlike Wi-Fi). WiMAX is looking to standardise this so that your laptop will work in all WiMAX zones not just Toshiba ones as an example

metric
3rd May 2006, 21:23
about fookin time

cowpoos
3rd May 2006, 21:38
3G is poos,

EH!!! hay....eh hore....wats your boggle!!!!!

boomer
3rd May 2006, 22:41
Hate to burst your bubble here, I'm also a telescum hater. A lot of my clients have tried 3G data and the coverage seriously sux. It keeps cutting down to GPRS speed and thats slooooooow.
Funny was I had a client in Miramar (Peter Jacksonville) who lived right near a LARGE bill board for 3G and couldnt even get a 3G signal.

Good price but they really need to increase the coverage.

I've been in the industry for about 10+ years and seen a lot come and go. The main problems with new players are the fact that there aren't enough population wize to make them fly! The investment in backbone is too great given our geographic spread and topography.


Burst my bubble? i'm the manager for a certain Telco with 14years experience :blip:

Advertising is just that..advertising... it aint gonna give your phone or other device a signal :p Coverage aint a bill board. i bet you believ e it when ....Red bull says it gives u wings.. Mastercard tells u your experiences using it are priceless.... maccona tells you you can get laid by a sexy finish chick... The banks tell you that mortgages are cheap....Coke tells us we can have fun with our friends.... Easy Off Bam tells us we can have clean ovens QUICK....Yellow pages tells us we can be be crap at golf and own our won business'.

I say Bollox!!!!

Insanity_rules
4th May 2006, 07:33
Burst my bubble? i'm the manager for a certain Telco with 14years experience :blip:

Advertising is just that..advertising... it aint gonna give your phone or other device a signal :p Coverage aint a bill board. i bet you believ e it when ....Red bull says it gives u wings.. Mastercard tells u your experiences using it are priceless.... maccona tells you you can get laid by a sexy finish chick... The banks tell you that mortgages are cheap....Coke tells us we can have fun with our friends.... Easy Off Bam tells us we can have clean ovens QUICK....Yellow pages tells us we can be be crap at golf and own our won business'.

I say Bollox!!!!

Dont get me wrong, its a good price and all that but I'd like to believe that voda has sorted the 3G coverage issues when reality and experience tells me they haven't.

I'm not that naive to believe advertising but my clients believe it. And when you gotta break it to them that the technology they just bought on the strength of that advertising isn't going to do what they think its going to do it kinda sux.

The sales staff for telecom and vodafone don't help any as they're not really trained to tell you what its going to do in the real world, they're trained using said advertising (I know I used to sell and sales manage for both Voda and telescum).

Quite often too that product or service is sold with a contract that has to remain connected for a set amount of time not allowing the purchaser to change it for something more suitable if said service doesn't live up to its hype.

I firmly believe that using a CDMA/GPRS or even a satelite type backbone for calls and data are the way forward rather than clumsy fixed cabling as the cost of upgrading the network technology is far less when rolling it out over a population.

14 years in one industry like telecomunications these days is an impressive record but I'm amazed that your not just a little more jaded like me. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the value of this perception. At least you ride a Honda and that shows you have good taste.

Lou Girardin
4th May 2006, 08:09
This is biker politics and law?

James Deuce
4th May 2006, 08:12
"CDMA/GPRS or even a satelite type"

All suck for bursty positional data - i.e. Internet gaming, the second biggest Internet "interactive" data generator after pR0n.

All I can say about unbundling is: Be careful what you ask for; you may just get it.

Cookie
4th May 2006, 08:26
"CDMA/GPRS or even a satelite type"

All suck for bursty positional data [...]



Yep - and in my experience wireless can suck with "rain fade" and problems like "things" being between you and the nearest station. That's crap.

From this weeks Computerworld re: Telecom's current bullsh!t "Faster, Cheaper" offer:


...Asked if it wasn't reasonable for customers to expect both faster and cheaper broadband, Berry says Telecom's "high-level advertising" states "faster, cheaper broadband" - without an "and" to separate the words.
Therefore, customers can expect one or the other, but not both at the same time....

The rabbits were in charge of the lettuce patch.

Paul in NZ
4th May 2006, 08:47
Weeeelll....

I started the telecommunications industry in 1974. (yes really) and am still kinda in it now.

I've built a lot of the infrastructure still in use and seen the industry go from valves and electromechanical to god knows what! fads and fashions in technology come and go every few years. FOTS is hot, DMR is in FOTS is out DMR is out Satellite is cool.. Bah!

However, like nearly every other major utility in this country, the guts of the transport and delivery mechanisim is stuff that was built in the period from the 1960's through to the middle of the 1980's. Sure, repairs and enhancements are done constantly but there have been very few major technology updates and roll outs since then. Mostly because the shareholders require a return!

You cannot realistically expect the same telecommunications infrastructure in a country of 4 million spread out over the kind of terrain that we have that you would get in New York or even Christchurch and it's not just telecoms fault. BCL own hundreds of towers and other high points and a massive network but will they unbundle? Nope!

As Jim2 says, be careful folks, especially if youn live in a smaller community!

Insanity_rules
4th May 2006, 09:10
Yep - and in my experience wireless can suck with "rain fade" and problems like "things" being between you and the nearest station. That's crap.

From this weeks Computerworld re: Telecom's current bullsh!t "Faster, Cheaper" offer:


...Asked if it wasn't reasonable for customers to expect both faster and cheaper broadband, Berry says Telecom's "high-level advertising" states "faster, cheaper broadband" - without an "and" to separate the words.
Therefore, customers can expect one or the other, but not both at the same time....

The rabbits were in charge of the lettuce patch.

I fully agree, telecom acted fast to spin a bad situation that it created to try to look like a hero. When in actual fact they were forced to move in that direction. Even the actualities of their deal benefit them greatly not the end user. Talk about rip off.

I use a 1X cellular data modem on a daily basis and I feel that technology has its act together. Coverage is good and the actual real world data speed is acceptable (although would be crap for gaming).

WIFI back bone does have a top end potential to be good but the current broadcast power is not good enough.

James Deuce
4th May 2006, 09:26
I use a 1X cellular data modem on a daily basis and I feel that technology has its act together. Coverage is good and the actual real world data speed is acceptable (although would be crap for gaming).



Speed isn't the issue. Telecom has taken to packet queueing to combat bandwidth hogging from gamers and VOIP, at major gateways in their network. Time critical app front end to server, and peer to peer comms get hammered by this, while non-time critical data doesn't care. Customers like yourself don't notice that there is an issue, while people who use their Internet connections the way I described earlier, do have a problem. QOS needs to be consistent and adhered to. If Telecom aren't going to provide an Internet backbone that supports two growing and increasingly important uses of the Internet then they should say so.

I think the quality issues with NZ Internet connectivity far outweigh issues around unbundling. Who's going to invest in NZ local loop? It's bloody expensive for a minimum return, as Paul in NZ has pointed out.

Swoop
4th May 2006, 09:28
Telecom WILL price the competition out of the market. They don't have to fund the investment like their competition will.
Big deal.
Telescum can offer free internet access and I'll still be with another company - ON PRINCIPAL!!!:angry:

Swoop
4th May 2006, 09:48
...The only reason it rates in New Zealand is that it our largest publicly listed company and dominates the whole NZX...
Why does this have any bearing on a R-18 porn magazine.....?

and why can't the stock exchange cease piggybacking on the success of the porn industry???:blip: :blip:

TwoSeven
4th May 2006, 09:58
As far as I know, WiMax is two standards (with now a spanish unit doing the certification). 802.16-2004 is the standard for the wireless backhaul (think wireless main trunk line) and is designed for carriers, 802.16 (might be 802.16 e) is the standard for the end user equipment.

Last pricing I saw was approx US$10k for the tower with support for 1000 users at 50mbit over 6miles (75mb closer up). Although this may be unrealistic pricing as I've not seen any 'actuals' once all the issues have been resovled. Compare that to the cost of a mobile MSC/BSC and you'll see how competitive it is.

No need to try and scare all the rural users. Unbundling means [or should mean - we dont actually know what the legislation actually provides yet] that a rural community or even a business can get together and install their own service rather than having to get someone else to do it.

Realistically tho, once the technology becomes slightly more stable, people work out the cost model and test the viability I think that may become a good option.

The only other issue about control of the last mile that I've seen happen is the set top box wars. I would like to see the box providers be forced to allow other branded boxes (such as baseband decoders) used, so that us consumers can access better technology than what is provided without having to be stung second box charges and all the other muck.

rogson
4th May 2006, 12:35
It is obscene that Telecom was permitted (through government acquiescence) to make $850 million profit a year (by definition - surplus over cost). Thats over $200 they have taken out of every man, woman and child's pocket in NZ to give to their shareholders.

The government asked them to use this surplus to foster a public good - i.e. promote more pervasive and lower cost communications - but that actually generated conflicts of interest for Telecom - so its about time the rug was pulled.

sAsLEX
4th May 2006, 17:48
As far as I know, WiMax is two standards (with now a spanish unit doing the certification). 802.16-2004 is the standard for the wireless backhaul (think wireless main trunk line) and is designed for carriers, 802.16 (might be 802.16 e) is the standard for the end user equipment.


Basically wrong but right kinda. WiMAX is looking to make one standard, with backhaul and mobile, NLOS aspects incorparted into it. This is to make it so like Wi-Fi everyone is reading from the same page(where at the moment everyone is taking their own view of the 802.16 standard), the WiMAX forum wants to also administer a WiMAX compatible mark to put on equipment that works with other WiMAX equipment.

But yes it is based on the 802.16 standard which has the 2004 ammendement and the e ammendment is for mobile applications of up to vehicular speeds.

Indoo
6th May 2006, 19:31
Jim2 speaks the truth...

TwoSeven
6th May 2006, 21:42
Speed isn't the issue. Telecom has taken to packet queueing to combat bandwidth hogging from gamers and VOIP, at major gateways in their network.

Its not bandwidth hogging. Its called standard usage models if they'd look at trends around the world. People dont just read static web pages anymore (well they do in this country), they have moved on and are using peer to peer technology and client server (which is what online gaming is).

Not our fault that the telco's designed their network capacity for the wrong usage model. Anyone with any sense would have designed for a much larger capacity and used symetric traffic.

Still I agree, if telecom thing that the world is full of aunt janes that read web pages, then they should just say - let someone else build the network :)

James Deuce
6th May 2006, 22:23
Its not bandwidth hogging.

It is from Telecom's perspective.

I didn't think I would need to point deliberate irony out to an Englishman.

TwoSeven
6th May 2006, 22:37
Keh - No sprechy die native :)

Still, I can understand em using some shaping, just that sometimes the way telco's often say things - its always the users fault they have to do it the way they do.

sAsLEX
6th May 2006, 23:16
just that sometimes the way telco's often say things

Like look at your marvelous new upgrade!

When they meant to say: your net might be quicker at 0430 in the morning but will be even suckier at all other times now