Orcon open letter Commerce Commision

1 | 2

Regs

10100111001
3177 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 211069 30-Apr-2009 22:16
i dont know why anyone (telecom, orcon, vodafone, telstraclear) would bother spending any money on infrastructure - such as cabinetisation and adsl2 - when its all supposedly to be replaced by FTTH. Its probably in the best interests of orcon to delay rolling out any more infrastructure in places where a quick dollar can't be made. If they can be seen to be complaining about something being unfair then it probably makes them look like the 'good guy' while they are doing it. Telecom wholesale certainly can't sell access below cost if there's no chance of an ROI in the near future. And where is all the investment in unbundled services from telstraclear after years of whining and lobbying? Vodafone appear to be a lot more active in these areas - good for them. Unfortunately most of the $$ spent with vodafone disappear offshore. Need help implementing Microsoft CRM? Give OA Systems a shout. Winners of CRM Solution of the Year at the 2010 Microsoft NZ Partner Awards

6895 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 211115 1-May-2009 02:33
grant_k: Any attempt to cross-subsidise rural cabinets at the expense of urban cabinets is bound to fail. The farmers are a powerful lobby group and provide a large proportion of New Zealand Inc's income via export sales don't under estimate them.

51 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 211203 1-May-2009 13:54
The farmers are a powerful lobby group and provide a large proportion of New Zealand Inc's income via export sales don't under estimate them. agreed

708 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Orcon

Subscriber

Reply # 212027 4-May-2009 09:32
Regs: i dont know why anyone (telecom, orcon, vodafone, telstraclear) would bother spending any money on infrastructure - such as cabinetisation and adsl2 - when its all supposedly to be replaced by FTTH. (I don't have my Orcon hat on here, these are my views.). FTTH is sometime away, plus the Goverments priority is to connect schools, business and hospitals. Homes are last on the list. The money will run out long before they get to getting fibre to a reasonable number of homes. Cabinet unbundling is a quick fix, which could be rolled out within months/years. FTTH is 5+ years away. However its hard for the smaller guys compete. Lets say 200-300 users total is a cabinet. a 5% market share would mean an average of 15 customers per cabinet. If the Access seeker is paying $630 for the space, $700 for the backhaul per month AND paying for the equipment. Its not a viable buiness model. If that is the case, then all the work the Labour govement has doen to make a level playing field in NZ, has gone down the drain. UCLL from exchanges will still be used, however a huge number of customers will not longer be accessable, resulting in the customers going back to Telecom Wholesale, which again removes competition. Back to square one. (I don't have my Orcon hat on here, these are my views).

10100111001
3177 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 212039 4-May-2009 10:10
Sounddude: Cabinet unbundling is a quick fix, which could be rolled out within months/years. FTTH is 5+ years away. However its hard for the smaller guys compete. Lets say 200-300 users total is a cabinet. a 5% market share would mean an average of 15 customers per cabinet. If the Access seeker is paying $630 for the space, $700 for the backhaul per month AND paying for the equipment. Its not a viable buiness model. my quote was a bit tounge-in-cheek i guess - of course cabinets make sense in the short term. with the speed of the RMA and other issues i'll not be holding my breath waiting for FTTH and I think there are indeed higher priorities than homes. As far as the costing goes - I dont have a problem with access being granted at a fair/reasonable price but I cant see why telecom should be made to provide access at a loss. If they did so then they would find themselves in the position you describe above - with costs outweighing the revenues. Why should they do that? They are not a govt owned entity anymore - they are a business with shareholders. Need help implementing Microsoft CRM? Give OA Systems a shout. Winners of CRM Solution of the Year at the 2010 Microsoft NZ Partner Awards

708 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Orcon

Subscriber

Reply # 212085 4-May-2009 13:03
Regs: As far as the costing goes - I dont have a problem with access being granted at a fair/reasonable price but I cant see why telecom should be made to provide access at a loss. If they did so then they would find themselves in the position you describe above - with costs outweighing the revenues. Why should they do that? They are not a govt owned entity anymore - they are a business with shareholders. (again I don't have my orcon hat on, and these are my views). I agree too, no company should have to give it away for less than cost. however Telecom have overcomplicated the backhaul, increasing the cost, and I am not convinced the cost of colocation is accurate. You can get a full rack in a DC for $1k/month with full backup power, Aircon etc , yet a cabinet is $630 for 3U of space, with basic DC power and no cooling.

1 | 2