Fibre to Home when on a ROW

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Fibre to Home when on a ROW

ronw

1222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 85

#105428 4-Jul-2012 10:51

I am waiting for Fibre to become available to my home. I have two fibre companies running down my berm but it appears that because my property is on a ROW (even though it is the first house with street frontage) that it will not be able to have FTH installed.
Has anyone any information on what is going to happen with houses on ROW's

Nokia 7 Plus
Nexus 6P 32Gb
Nexus 6 Phone
Nexus 5 Phone
Nexus 7 2013 Tablet
Samsung TAB A 8"
Samsung TAB A 10"

& many Windows laptops, Desktops etc

1 | 2 | 3

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#650531 4-Jul-2012 10:54

Who told you this?

And who are the fibre companies? I assume you're meaning existing fibre rather than the UFB GPON fibre?

ronw

1222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 85

#650533 4-Jul-2012 10:59

The companies are Chorus and Vector.
I am with Orcon and they admit there are problems with supplying FTH because of Choruses 15M rule so even though I am well within that distance I have to wait until the Fibre Comission or whatever it is called and Chorus agree

sbiddle: Who told you this?

And who are the fibre companies? I assume you're meaning existing fibre rather than the UFB GPON fibre?

Nokia 7 Plus
Nexus 6P 32Gb
Nexus 6 Phone
Nexus 5 Phone
Nexus 7 2013 Tablet
Samsung TAB A 8"
Samsung TAB A 10"

& many Windows laptops, Desktops etc

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#650536 4-Jul-2012 11:05

This has been discussed in numerous places in the past few weeks including Commerce Commission documents. While there are distance limits for a free install and a charge when you exceed these, Chorus are not enforcing these until the end of the year.

Based upon what you've said there is no reason why you can't be installed. Clearly if it was with Vector it won't as simple as it would be with Chorus and you'll probably be looking at a least a few thousand $ since their network isn't GPON, and isn't part of the Govt funded UFB project so full cost recovery will occur.

ronw

1222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 85

#650545 4-Jul-2012 11:31

Thanks I understand that and obviously I will expect to use the Chorus fibre which is GPON and who are connecting the stuff for Orcon. But for whatever reason it seems that its not going to happen any-time soon which is really annoying.
I dont want to even consider having to pay additional charges to get Fibre when my residence is there alongside the Chorus Fibre

sbiddle: This has been discussed in numerous places in the past few weeks including Commerce Commission documents. While there are distance limits for a free install and a charge when you exceed these, Chorus are not enforcing these until the end of the year.

Based upon what you've said there is no reason why you can't be installed. Clearly if it was with Vector it won't as simple as it would be with Chorus and you'll probably be looking at a least a few thousand $ since their network isn't GPON, and isn't part of the Govt funded UFB project so full cost recovery will occur.

Nokia 7 Plus
Nexus 6P 32Gb
Nexus 6 Phone
Nexus 5 Phone
Nexus 7 2013 Tablet
Samsung TAB A 8"
Samsung TAB A 10"

& many Windows laptops, Desktops etc

maverick

3594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 80

Trusted

WorldxChange

#650560 4-Jul-2012 11:59

And here lies the rub for fibre which people in charge of the UFB seemed to have not placed an importance on, this is going to be some of the major factors when it comes to take up rates.

Who pays for it ??????

The cost of installing this, the row issue along with multi tenanted apartments are big stumbling blocks , our CTO Paul Clarkin has been highlighting this since day one in the industry forums, as you yourself have said you don't want to have to even consider paying extra, yet the work involved in getting fibre down a row as well as the install is HUGE, how may people involved , time materials, equipment etc this totals hundreds if not thousands of dollars and all for a residential customer that may be returning a few dollars a month in profit ... who do we justify this ?

Just throwing it out there

Yes I am a employee of WxC (My Profile) ... but I do have my own opinions as well

https://www.facebook.com/wxccommunications

oxnsox

1923 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 138

#650582 4-Jul-2012 12:38

maverick: And here lies the rub for fibre which people in charge of the UFB seemed to have not placed an importance on, this is going to be some of the major factors when it comes to take up rates.

Who pays for it ??????

The cost of installing this, the row issue along with multi tenanted apartments are big stumbling blocks , our CTO Paul Clarkin has been highlighting this since day one in the industry forums, as you yourself have said you don't want to have to even consider paying extra, yet the work involved in getting fibre down a row as well as the install is HUGE, how may people involved , time materials, equipment etc this totals hundreds if not thousands of dollars and all for a residential customer that may be returning a few dollars a month in profit ... who do we justify this ?

Just throwing it out there

Surely one could use that same argument for copper... (or any service to the door from the 'main' source).

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

maverick

3594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 80

Trusted

WorldxChange

#650583 4-Jul-2012 12:42

Copper is already there and with cabinetisation and VDSL offerings can the cost of Fibre deployments justify the money, investment vs the rate of return vs value ... especially when the margins are very small here and customers don't want to pay

Yes I am a employee of WxC (My Profile) ... but I do have my own opinions as well

https://www.facebook.com/wxccommunications

maverick

3594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 80

Trusted

WorldxChange

#650588 4-Jul-2012 12:49

Look don't get me wrong Fibre is a great technology and we use it extensively , I am just not 100% convinced the powers that decided the commercials around this had any real idea of the issues involved and just blew right past them to get something in the ground ....

This is imho and not the opinion of the company btw, that is of course unless we have a management meeting and we decide I'm right ... but that doesn't happen often, Im not the politically correct one on the team :)

Yes I am a employee of WxC (My Profile) ... but I do have my own opinions as well

https://www.facebook.com/wxccommunications

Zeon

3926 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 759

Trusted

#650596 4-Jul-2012 13:04

Perhaps the ISPs could come up with some financing plans of the install costs?

Speedtest 2019-10-14

ronw

1222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 85

#650621 4-Jul-2012 13:33

My problem was that I already have the fibre laid. I live on the street frontage and it would be easy to connect me. But they wont because Chorus are trying to get more money out of the fibre contract.
There are several houses on my ROW which yes would cost additional I understand that but we should deal with the situation as it is. I am on street frontage and want fibre but cannot get it
This is what happens when the Government licence only on company in the area to connect under the UFB. If it had not of been such an anti public ownership it would have laid the cable as a public owned cable which any legitimate company should be allowed to connect to.
We never learn. We say what happened when we sold NZPO and allowed one company to hold NZ to ransom because the owned the last mile copper. We should not have allowed the same company to end up owning the publicly paid for Fibre

Zeon: Perhaps the ISPs could come up with some financing plans of the install costs?

Nokia 7 Plus
Nexus 6P 32Gb
Nexus 6 Phone
Nexus 5 Phone
Nexus 7 2013 Tablet
Samsung TAB A 8"
Samsung TAB A 10"

& many Windows laptops, Desktops etc

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#650628 4-Jul-2012 13:51

ronw: My problem was that I already have the fibre laid. I live on the street frontage and it would be easy to connect me. But they wont because Chorus are trying to get more money out of the fibre contract.
There are several houses on my ROW which yes would cost additional I understand that but we should deal with the situation as it is. I am on street frontage and want fibre but cannot get it
This is what happens when the Government licence only on company in the area to connect under the UFB. If it had not of been such an anti public ownership it would have laid the cable as a public owned cable which any legitimate company should be allowed to connect to.
We never learn. We say what happened when we sold NZPO and allowed one company to hold NZ to ransom because the owned the last mile copper. We should not have allowed the same company to end up owning the publicly paid for Fibre
Zeon: Perhaps the ISPs could come up with some financing plans of the install costs?

You raise a good point, but there are a few things worth of consideration.

Chorus may have installed fibre, but it's not connected to your home. If you have gas running past hour home it'll cost you somewhere between $2000 - $5000 to have this connected. Your gas company won't pay this, you do. For fibre the true cost of provisioning a customer is probably somewhere in the vicinity of $2000 per customer, a cost that is essentially being funded by you as a tax payer up to a certain point. For costs beyond that somebody has to pay, and the decision obviously needs to be made as to whether the tax payer should fund that full cost, or whether a home owner should do if they want a fibre service.

The whole issue of apartment blocks, MUD's etc is a tough one. Potentially costs could sky rocket, and IMHO it would seem unfair it taxpayers had to subsidise LFC's to a greater level to fund installs.

My person belief is that fibre is a great technology and I have no issue with the UFB project. Try and build a business case for it however and you'll struggle past the first line, because every single aspect of the rollout costs some BIG $, and there will never be a ROI on those expenses. If an ISP was expected to fund the ~$2000 for an average install there would be no way this could reastically be recovered on a $70 per month connection.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

maverick

3594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 80

Trusted

WorldxChange

#650630 4-Jul-2012 13:54

Our argument exactly Steve and pretty much bang on ...

Yes I am a employee of WxC (My Profile) ... but I do have my own opinions as well

https://www.facebook.com/wxccommunications

ronw

1222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 85

#650637 4-Jul-2012 14:00

Under your idea it would not be possible to build the original telephone system as the infrastructure costs would outweigh and financial plan. However Governments can and do fund projects like this for the greater good.
I see no problem with Government paying for Fibre to apartments etc as long as they own it afterwards. What I object to is the tax payer paying for the fibre and a private company ending up owning it. It is wrong and its just another way of this government privatising the profits and socialising the costs.
WE the taxpayer pay the costs and telecom/Chorus get the profits and also get to dictate where and when people are connected.
Its wrong wrong wrong.

sbiddle:

You raise a good point, but there are a few things worth of consideration.

Chorus may have installed fibre, but it's not connected to your home. If you have gas running past hour home it'll cost you somewhere between $2000 - $5000 to have this connected. Your gas company won't pay this, you do. For fibre the true cost of provisioning a customer is probably somewhere in the vicinity of $2000 per customer, a cost that is essentially being funded by you as a tax payer up to a certain point. For costs beyond that somebody has to pay, and the decision obviously needs to be made as to whether the tax payer should fund that full cost, or whether a home owner should do if they want a fibre service.

The whole issue of apartment blocks, MUD's etc is a tough one. Potentially costs could sky rocket, and IMHO it would seem unfair it taxpayers had to subsidise LFC's to a greater level to fund installs.

My person belief is that fibre is a great technology and I have no issue with the UFB project. Try and build a business case for it however and you'll struggle past the first line, because every single aspect of the rollout costs some BIG $, and there will never be a ROI on those expenses. If an ISP was expected to fund the ~$2000 for an average install there would be no way this could reastically be recovered on a $70 per month connection.

Nokia 7 Plus
Nexus 6P 32Gb
Nexus 6 Phone
Nexus 5 Phone
Nexus 7 2013 Tablet
Samsung TAB A 8"
Samsung TAB A 10"

& many Windows laptops, Desktops etc

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#650656 4-Jul-2012 14:49

ronw: Under your idea it would not be possible to build the original telephone system as the infrastructure costs would outweigh and financial plan. However Governments can and do fund projects like this for the greater good.
I see no problem with Government paying for Fibre to apartments etc as long as they own it afterwards. What I object to is the tax payer paying for the fibre and a private company ending up owning it. It is wrong and its just another way of this government privatising the profits and socialising the costs.
WE the taxpayer pay the costs and telecom/Chorus get the profits and also get to dictate where and when people are connected.
Its wrong wrong wrong.

Telecom and Chorus are two different companies. If there are profits from the UFB project (and that's a very bold assumption to make) Telecom won't get any of them, Chorus would.

You're also ignoring the fact that the government doesn't own the network because they're not paying the cost. Their $929 million given to Chorus is an interest free loan. If the government owned the network you would have a point, but they don't. They are only loaning the money.

IMHO at the end of the day (and people are going to scoff at me) I can still see a very real chance of the UFB rollout never being completed come 2014/2015 when some true costs start to mount up.

Why do Chorus want to charge extra for custom installs while other LFC's are saying their will be no charge? Maybe Chorus are the only industry player who knows the true cost of deployment and of truck rolls.

Ragnor

8279 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 585

Trusted

#650665 4-Jul-2012 15:02

Crown fibre dropped the ball in not making the connection requirements the same for all LFC's in negotiations.

Chorus obviously had more savvy/smart/realistic? negotiators than the other LFC's

See:
http://nztelco.com/?p=531

1 | 2 | 3