Commerce Commission lays charges on Voda for FibreX

Forums › One NZ (including Farmside) › Commerce Commission lays charges on Voda for FibreX

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

13732 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6207

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1995928 14-Apr-2018 10:08

frednz:

I don't condone the use of the term "Fibre X" by Vodafone, but I doubt whether anyone who did even a small of amount of research into it could have been fooled by Vodafone's advertising.

lol you think the majority of people research things? there is the problem right there.

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 429
Inactive user

#1995948 14-Apr-2018 10:58

Jase2985:

frednz:

I don't condone the use of the term "Fibre X" by Vodafone, but I doubt whether anyone who did even a small of amount of research into it could have been fooled by Vodafone's advertising.

lol you think the majority of people research things? there is the problem right there.

If people aren't capable of doing the necessary research for buying any product, then they need to get suitably qualified people to help them. Would you buy a house, a computer, a car etc etc without really understanding what it is you are buying?

If a product turns out to be faulty or doesn't operate as advertised, you have rights under the Fair Trading Act and the Consumer Guarantees Act to remedy the situation.

ajw

1968 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 369

#1995953 14-Apr-2018 11:01

frednz:

Jase2985:

frednz:

I don't condone the use of the term "Fibre X" by Vodafone, but I doubt whether anyone who did even a small of amount of research into it could have been fooled by Vodafone's advertising.

lol you think the majority of people research things? there is the problem right there.

If people aren't capable of doing the necessary research for buying any product, then they need to get suitably qualified people to help them. Would you buy a house, a computer, a car etc etc without really understanding what it is you are buying?

If a product turns out to be faulty or doesn't operate as advertised, you have rights under the Fair Trading Act and the Consumer Guarantees Act to remedy the situation.

But you are forgetting that some people expect to be spoon fed and can't think for themselves.

raytaylor

4076 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1296

Trusted

#1995985 14-Apr-2018 11:46

Lias:

When you throw in them also refusing offer UFB services to customers in HFC areas, it looks even worse.

They should not be required to sell a UFB service if they have something else they want to offer customers. There should be no reason VF or any other ISP is forced to sell a UFB service in an area they dont want to.

Ray Taylor

There is no place like localhost

Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here

raytaylor

4076 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1296

Trusted

#1995994 14-Apr-2018 12:08

Hammerer:

This problem could have been avoided if the UFB rollout required access to UFB to be provided without discrimination, i.e. if Vodafone offer it anywhere then they have to offer it everywhere it is available. It makes sense that the UFB rollout doesn't require this because it would create some other problems for companies who also have to transition from other technologies, not just from cable but from ADSL, VDSL, cabinets, and whatever else is out there.

I dont agree FiberX was a great name, but on your other point...

To offer UFB access in a region, you have to buy a UFB handover, rent cabinet space in the local exchange or the LFC's data centre, buy backhaul capacity to that handover and it all gets very expensive.

I run a local ISP and we offer UFB services on our own network in our local UFB region. There is no way that we, or other local ISPs could afford a national rollout of UFB services when we only want to offer service to our local area.

If any ISP was required to offer service nationally, then we would probably only have 3 or 4 to choose from on the UFB network.

Now if the LFC was required to backhaul everything to a national handover point like chorus' DSL, then the government wouldnt have been able to get the 2.5mbit CIR on the basic UFB plans from the LFCs because thats a boatload of backhaul they would have needed to provide.

And here is another thing....

We run a fixed wireless network that operates in UFB areas. It has the advantage that we can provide a reasonable speed service for low data usage at a cheaper rate than we can offer it using the actual UFB network.

We also run that network where DSL operates and we can deliver faster speeds than the DSL.

Now DSL backers could develop its technology like our wireless partners and get faster. Just like vodafone could deploy 10g DOCSIS before the LFC decides to upgrade the UFB network in the area.

I am staunchly against any punishment for vodafone as a result of not offering UFB in HFC regions because they ARE competing technologies, have different cost models and NZ actually claims to be a free country.

It would set a *very* bad precedent.

And I say that even as vodafone is a competitor on the fixed wireless.

Ray Taylor

There is no place like localhost

Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here

antoniosk

2383 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 747

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1996011 14-Apr-2018 12:33

I guess the only discrepancy is at the top end... if I can get Fibre Max on voda I can have a 1g/500mbps fibre line but 1g/110mbps cable line... all for the same price. too bad if i want the faster upload speed?

________

Antoniosk

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

BarTender

3629 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2572

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1996179 14-Apr-2018 20:04

raytaylor:
Lias:

When you throw in them also refusing offer UFB services to customers in HFC areas, it looks even worse.

They should not be required to sell a UFB service if they have something else they want to offer customers. There should be no reason VF or any other ISP is forced to sell a UFB service in an area they dont want to.

And conversely I think Chorus should stop selling copper in areas where UFB has been built unless it's for a temporary stopgap before fibre is installed.

Hammerer

2480 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 802

Lifetime subscriber

#1996212 14-Apr-2018 21:26

raytaylor:

Hammerer:

This problem could have been avoided if the UFB rollout required access to UFB to be provided without discrimination, i.e. if Vodafone offer it anywhere then they have to offer it everywhere it is available. It makes sense that the UFB rollout doesn't require this because it would create some other problems for companies who also have to transition from other technologies, not just from cable but from ADSL, VDSL, cabinets, and whatever else is out there.

I dont agree FiberX was a great name, but on your other point...

...

I am staunchly against any punishment for vodafone as a result of not offering UFB in HFC regions because they ARE competing technologies, have different cost models and NZ actually claims to be a free country.

It would set a *very* bad precedent.

And I say that even as vodafone is a competitor on the fixed wireless.

Thanks for all the detail. I think that it is worthwhile stating your position so clearly.

Though I think that you've misinterpreted what I said. I said that my problem could be resolved by forcing Vodafone to provide me with fibre. But I didn't say that I wanted that sort of mandated solution or that I thought Vodafone should be punished in any way for coming up with a solution to their problem. Instead, I said that "it makes sense" not to force this transition. I just didn't go into any detail on the issues, some of which are those you mention.

hio77

'That VDSL Cat'
13036 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3896

ID Verified

Trusted

Lizard Networks

Subscriber

#1996645 15-Apr-2018 21:43

sbiddle:

Anybody care to answer what type of product BT Infinity is without cheating and Googling it first?

Purely by the name i'd say VDSL...

and oh look I'm right...

See "BT" pretty quickly implies it's copper.

Especially when your talking "infinity" which is a commonly used word for UK internet.

#include <std_disclaimer>

Any comments made are personal opinion and do not reflect directly on the position my current or past employers may have.

Buckchoi

119 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 43

#1996912 16-Apr-2018 11:11

BREAKING NEWS: Vodafone New Zealand have relented and agreed to rebrand "FibreX". The new name for the broadband service is "I Can't Believe It's Not Fibre!".

networkn

Networkn
32868 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15456

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1996916 16-Apr-2018 11:17

Heh, kinda interesting to see how many people are hoping the company gets a huge fine, when they have failed to realize, the consumer will pay this fine in the longer term anyways.

I, like Sbiddle, agree it's not that confusing, but they should have used a different name to avoid any confusion. As someone else mentioned, your average consumer only cares what speed they get, not how it's delivered. The issue for me is whether people actually get their target speed.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32868 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15456

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1996919 16-Apr-2018 11:19

BarTender:
raytaylor:

Lias:

When you throw in them also refusing offer UFB services to customers in HFC areas, it looks even worse.

They should not be required to sell a UFB service if they have something else they want to offer customers. There should be no reason VF or any other ISP is forced to sell a UFB service in an area they dont want to.

And conversely I think Chorus should stop selling copper in areas where UFB has been built unless it's for a temporary stopgap before fibre is installed.

They have, I couldn't re-sign my copper lines on a contract with either VF or Spark, it was a 6 month drama.

For all it's benefits, we have more customers down who use Fibre, over the Auckland storms, than we do with Copper Services, and the copper services have been fixed MUCH faster.

ajw

1968 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 369

#1996920 16-Apr-2018 11:19

networkn:

Heh, kinda interesting to see how many people are hoping the company gets a huge fine, when they have failed to realize, the consumer will pay this fine in the longer term anyways.

I, like Sbiddle, agree it's not that confusing, but they should have used a different name to avoid any confusion. As someone else mentioned, your average consumer only cares what speed they get, not how it's delivered. The issue for me is whether people actually get their target speed.

Exactly, some people seem to thrive on negativity.

networkn

Networkn
32868 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15456

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1996922 16-Apr-2018 11:23

ajw:

networkn:

Heh, kinda interesting to see how many people are hoping the company gets a huge fine, when they have failed to realize, the consumer will pay this fine in the longer term anyways.

I, like Sbiddle, agree it's not that confusing, but they should have used a different name to avoid any confusion. As someone else mentioned, your average consumer only cares what speed they get, not how it's delivered. The issue for me is whether people actually get their target speed.

Exactly, some people seem to thrive on negativity.

It's a real shame to me that there is a lot of wishing people a bad time on this forum lately, or laughing at their misfortune. I was particularly surprised to see Spark members here commenting, they aren't exactly clear of similar claims themselves. They have a long and storied history of run ins with the commerce commision. Glass houses and all that.

ajw

1968 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 369

#1996924 16-Apr-2018 11:27

networkn:

ajw:

networkn:

Heh, kinda interesting to see how many people are hoping the company gets a huge fine, when they have failed to realize, the consumer will pay this fine in the longer term anyways.

I, like Sbiddle, agree it's not that confusing, but they should have used a different name to avoid any confusion. As someone else mentioned, your average consumer only cares what speed they get, not how it's delivered. The issue for me is whether people actually get their target speed.

Exactly, some people seem to thrive on negativity.

It's a real shame to me that there is a lot of wishing people a bad time on this forum lately, or laughing at their misfortune. I was particularly surprised to see Spark members here commenting, they aren't exactly clear of similar claims themselves. They have a long and storied history of run ins with the commerce commision. Glass houses and all that.

I'm a great believer in the saying. " Actions speak louder than words"

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9