Well I recorded and uploaded last nights story on 'Telecoms Super Fast Broadband'
Sorry for my grainy channel one :o
Video: Tv1 Sunday
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The bit that annoyed me most about this story was at the end, where Sunday said they asked Telecom why did they 'unleash' broadband. To which the response was, the Commerce Commission told us to. Sunday then asked the Commerce Commission and they said that the ruling was for Wholesale customers only, and not Telecom's retail customers. While this is fine, they portrayed this in a negative way, implying in my view that Telecom should not have 'unleashed' broadband, to at the very least remain completive in their broadband offerings. Not a good look when your competitors are offering faster speeds than you on your own network. We all know that Alcatel-Lucent advised what would happen, and I believe so did the commerce commission.
nzbnw
A time-poor geek is hardly a geek at all
if so why would any company spend one red cent on thier network untill they knew that wern't just spending money on competitors who instead of getting out and putting thier own fast network in have consistantly relied on winning consessions from government and industry watchdogs?
TinyTim: ...or Telecom, realising it's actually going to have to spend some of that remuneration on its network, rather than handing it to shareholders.
Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies | Hatch | GoodSync | Backblaze backup
lugh: I find David Cunliffe's rote response to investment a bit irritating. Sure I can understand (to an extent) his point of view that competitors will invest in the network but is that really going to happen in the real world? Competitors will certainly invest in installing and upgrading equipment in the exchanges but I can't see the major investment required in upgrading the copper line network happening. Instead, we may end up with a hodge-podge of cable types in urban areas (Auckland benefiting the most of course) and little change in rural.
Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies | Hatch | GoodSync | Backblaze backup
freitasm:lugh: I find David Cunliffe's rote response to investment a bit irritating. Sure I can understand (to an extent) his point of view that competitors will invest in the network but is that really going to happen in the real world? Competitors will certainly invest in installing and upgrading equipment in the exchanges but I can't see the major investment required in upgrading the copper line network happening. Instead, we may end up with a hodge-podge of cable typesin urban areas (Auckland benefiting the most of course) and little change in rural.
See, this is exactly what I wrote when the LLU bill passed last year. I think it's appaling the Minister believing that companies will put any cent on expanding the current network. They will all wait for Telecom to do it, and then will simply try to use it. If Telecom doesn't see going to rural areas as strategic, I don't think any other company will put their money where their mouth is...
TinyTim:It's part of the Amendment Bill that unbundling is part of a "ladder of investment", rather than a long term solution for a competitor. That is, competitors are expected to eventually go out and build their own access network. I don't know how they'll achieve that in reality though.
Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies | Hatch | GoodSync | Backblaze backup
TinyTim:
It's part of the Amendment Bill that unbundling is part of a "ladder of investment", rather than a long term solution for a competitor. That is, competitors are expected to eventually go out and build their own access network. I don't know how they'll achieve that in reality though.
I guess the question here is why would build their own nation wide network? Very few companies or organisations will be able to afford to roll out nation wide, last mile wireless or fixed network.
nzbnw
nzbnw:TinyTim:
It's part of the Amendment Bill that unbundling is part of a "ladder of investment", rather than a long term solution for a competitor. That is, competitors are expected to eventually go out and build their own access network. I don't know how they'll achieve that in reality though.I guess the question here is why would build their own nation wide network? Very few companies or organisations will be able to afford to roll out nation wide, last mile wireless or fixed network.
nzbnw
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |