Why not leave the normal ONT in place if you are worried about people in the future wanting a legacy phone service?

nztim:

 

Nope, keep standards the same, this is the product that goes home/business with Bitstream2

 

As it's also been pointed out the SPO110 is VLAN Transparent so tagged VLAN10 for example would require the RSP to tag their handover

 

All for standards - is the SPO110 not the same ONT as this - https://sp.chorus.co.nz/inflight-projects/2ndgenxgs-ont ? which is delayed.

Jiriteach:

 

All for standards - is the SPO110 not the same ONT as this - https://sp.chorus.co.nz/inflight-projects/2ndgenxgs-ont ? which is delayed.

 

Negative. The inflight project is to replace the current fully-fledged Type 110 Hyperfibre ONT, which will be able to be used on "regular" BS2 services.

The SPO 110 ONT is a single port ONT without voice for BS3 services.

saf:

 

Jiriteach:

 

All for standards - is the SPO110 not the same ONT as this - https://sp.chorus.co.nz/inflight-projects/2ndgenxgs-ont ? which is delayed.

 

 

Negative. The inflight project is to replace the current fully-fledged Type 110 Hyperfibre ONT, which will be able to be used on "regular" BS2 services.

 

The SPO 110 ONT is a single port ONT without voice for BS3 services.

 

Ahh - that makes sense then - Thanks.

Jiriteach:

 

Vindy500:

 

It's mostly around our desire to have "residential" type ONTs inside houses. If we install a SPO into your house and then someone moves in and wants voice, we'll have to replace it which isn't ideal

 

 

Makes sense - an option would be good though? Only reason I'm holding of hyper fibre is because of the ONT. The current Nokia ONT's are just too big.

 

"The current Nokia ONT's are just too big."  We hear you and we are actively working on this - i.e. I've just spent a week and a half on leave... one of my first 2 meetings this morning was on ONTs.  However - we have some stock of the current Hyperfibre ONTs and we aren't just going to throw them away :)  That doesn't make business or environmental sense.

Optionality of ONTs is not straight forward - e.g (purely a hypothetical example!) You want a SPO ONT. We roll a truck to swap it and perhaps we charge you for that and you are OK with it.
Then you move out, someone else moves in and wants a voice service. 
Are they then stung with the cost of a truck roll? Or is it expected Chorus absorbs that cost? or do we change you double for the SPO swap in case there is a future truck roll after you move out?

Anywho, hypotheticals aside - We are very aware of customer and RSP thoughts about the ONTs.

BMarquis:

 

Jiriteach:

 

Vindy500:

 

It's mostly around our desire to have "residential" type ONTs inside houses. If we install a SPO into your house and then someone moves in and wants voice, we'll have to replace it which isn't ideal

 

 

Makes sense - an option would be good though? Only reason I'm holding of hyper fibre is because of the ONT. The current Nokia ONT's are just too big.

 

You're making an assumption there - that the SPO ONT meets the requirements of our residential services. We haven't tested it or released it for the BS2 offering.

 

"The current Nokia ONT's are just too big."  We hear you and we are actively working on this - i.e. I've just spent a week and a half on leave... one of my first 2 meetings this morning was on ONTs.  However - we have some stock of the current Hyperfibre ONTs and we aren't just going to throw them away :)  That doesn't make business or environmental sense.

Optionality of ONTs is not straight forward - e.g (purely a hypothetical example!) You want a SPO ONT. We roll a truck to swap it and perhaps we charge you for that and you are OK with it.
Then you move out, someone else moves in and wants a voice service. 
Are they then stung with the cost of a truck roll? Or is it expected Chorus absorbs that cost? or do we change you double for the SPO swap in case there is a future truck roll after you move out?

Anywho, hypotheticals aside - We are very aware of customer and RSP thoughts about the ONTs.

 

Yup - my assumption was incorrect. Assumed it was the same as the ones that were delayed until 2025.

The optionality does complicate things - some might be willing to pay double but its not a sustainable long-term solution. Then again - if the new ones at not too far away - I guess an option doesnt make sense as that needs time to be worked through.

Great to hear the work you guys are doing on this :)