Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 
7 posts

Wannabe Geek


  Reply # 51660 8-Nov-2006 19:52
Send private message

I think you don't realise the true cost... In the U.S. they have a single continental sized country to supply with Internet content, almost all of that coming from that same country.

In New Zealand almost all content comes from overseas.

While there are 120 million Internet users in the U.S, there are only 3 million Internet users in New Zealand (approximate numbers).

It's obivious the cost is very different. There's no way it would be economically viable to offer unlimited traffic here. By the way, even in the U.S. the ISPs use Fair Use Policy and will cut people that use too much.


I suppose it would be costly for Telecom to provide unlimited traffic...And NZ is a relatively small country so you wouldn't expect what you would get in other economically developed countries such as USA or Japan. I hope Telecom will release ADSL 2+ soon, a small but great leap in technology.

68 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user


  Reply # 51743 9-Nov-2006 16:41
Send private message

True, in some way NZ is severely lacking behind, in many ways NZ are leading the way, although not very significant or visible.


I love that, I had a really great laugh! (please, tell me all about the ways our broadband is leading the ways (in insignificant  invisible ways ;)

seriously, I'm still smiling and laughing.

BTW no, NZ isn't alone, we have Australia with a decent population near us, and Japan which is superconnected near them (and a fat 620GB pipe connecting them since 2001), and the SCC which if you bother to calculate it based of pupulation isn't very expensivelong paid off and not fully utilized. (Anyway NZ's national connection is what's really a complete mess, our international connectivity shouldn't be an issue for a while, in part because the SCC can doubled and Telstra are looking at builiding a connection because it's cheaper to build than paying the silly rates Telecom had the SCC people charge, Telecom of course in total pays not a dime for it's international connectivity)

Some of these guys just like to jump on anyone who mentions unlimited data, I really need to start making a file of the stuff they say...  (because obviously a mostly internationally owned company raking in billions of profits while putting clearly almost nothing into upgrading it's network (to the point the govt had to come in with guns blazing and regulate the #!%^ out of it and cut it up) needs their support more than the user who is powerless to do anything other than complain being that it's a virtual monopoly which uses anticompetative measures to squash any competition.)


Another thing that never gets old: 'Then, a recording emerged of an analyst briefing in which Gattung admitted that Telecom has used confusion as a marketing tool to keep prices up, and showed her naivety about the threat of unbundling by suggesting the government would never be “dumb” enough to proceed with such severe regulation.'


At least we can be amused while we wait for things to download...


652 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 51745 9-Nov-2006 16:58
Send private message

antigrav:  Telecom of course in total pays not a dime for it's international connectivity)



That's interesting, where did you pull that one from?

68 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user


  Reply # 51748 9-Nov-2006 17:09
Send private message

Telecom owns 50% of SCC.
The SCC has already paid for it's self so it's all profit. (cost of running it is laughible)
Telecom  obviously uses less than 50% of it. (because Telecom has only a very small presence in Oz, and Oz use it too and they are larger than us)
So Telecom are obviously paying their bills to the SCC but as 50% of all the money that everyone pays the SCC go back to Telecom (in some form of Telecom choice as an ex Telecom manager runs the SCC) and Telecom pays less 50% of all money collected then Telecom doesn't break even, it makes money on international traffic, while pretending that it's costly.
And the SCC is underutilized not for lack of demand of course but the inflated prices SCC chooses to charge.




652 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 51750 9-Nov-2006 17:14
Send private message

Your thought process is fascinating. Ridiculous, but fascinating...

4311 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 51751 9-Nov-2006 17:20
Send private message

antigrav:  Telecom of course in total pays not a dime for it's international connectivity)

Now I'm the one who's laughing. That is the stupidest thing I've heard for a long time.
antigrav: Telecom owns 50% of SCC.
The SCC has already paid for it's self so it's all profit. (cost of running it is laughible)
Telecom  obviously uses less than 50% of it. (because Telecom has only a very small presence in Oz, and Oz use it too and they are larger than us)
So Telecom are obviously paying their bills to the SCC but as 50% of all the money that everyone pays the SCC go back to Telecom (in some form of Telecom choice as an ex Telecom manager runs the SCC) and Telecom pays less 50% of all money collected then Telecom doesn't break even, it makes money on international traffic, while pretending that it's costly.
And the SCC is underutilized not for lack of demand of course but the inflated prices SCC chooses to charge.

Once again... stupid, stupid, stupid.

4311 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 51752 9-Nov-2006 17:21
Send private message

bcourtney: Your thought process is fascinating. Ridiculous, but fascinating...

What thought process?

68 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user


  Reply # 51753 9-Nov-2006 17:23
Send private message

Ok, so your view is that Telecom owns 50% of the SCC, and the money that the SCC generates is thrown into the sea? (no I don't mean into building another cable)

No? Ok so the profit (a lot of it) generated by the SCC are either reinvested into improving the SCC thereby improving Telecoms assests, or put into SCC's bank account (which increases the value of Telecoms 50% share) or it pays it's shareholders (cheifly Telecom).

Even if you don't accept that because you could argue that by using none of the SCC it could make more money, but even so you have to admit it gets 50% of whatever it pays the SCC back and that is indesputible, not sure what form it gets it back but as it's an ex telecom manager running it and it's the majority shareholder it will be Telecoms choice, Telecom probably gets a bit of a tax dodge too because it can make paying for international data a cost.






652 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 51754 9-Nov-2006 17:23
Send private message

bradstewart:
bcourtney: Your thought process is fascinating. Ridiculous, but fascinating...

What thought process?


Well that's precisely right. Was enough to put a smile on my dial after a fairly mundane day. The drive home will be somewhat more tolerable. Ah you guys... you do make me giggle

652 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 51755 9-Nov-2006 17:27
Send private message

antigrav: Ok, so your view is that Telecom owns 50% of the SCC, and the money that the SCC generates is thrown into the sea? (no I don't mean into building another cable)

No? Ok so the profit (a lot of it) generated by the SCC are either reinvested into improving the SCC thereby improving Telecoms assests, or put into SCC's bank account (which increases the value of Telecoms 50% share) or it pays it's shareholders (cheifly Telecom).




The ACC has a HUGE property portfolio that they make a pretty profit on. Does this require them to use this, in turn, to invest back into the ACC's main focus of business thus lowering our ACC levies? I think not.

INCREDIBLY off topic and becoming more boring to laugh at than a 3 foot carnie... stop and create YOURSELF a new thread

4311 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 51756 9-Nov-2006 17:28
Send private message

No please don't create a new new thread. It will just get flamed and then I will have to ban somebody.

Nate wants an iphone
3901 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 28

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 51759 9-Nov-2006 17:35
Send private message

bcourtney:
INCREDIBLY off topic and becoming more boring to laugh at than a 3 foot carnie... stop and create YOURSELF a new thread

At the very least this thread is NOT the place for discussion on the Southern Cross cable. Its been discussed in other threads with them eventually being locked. I don't want this thread to follow that path. This thread is to discuss Telstraclear and 'unlimited' broadband, not Telecom. 

antigrav, please take that topic to a thread that is actually related to it. 

Edit: I posted this after the thread got locked so most of it won't apply. 
Edit 2: Fixed major mistake




webhosting |New Zealand connectionsgeekzone IRC chat
Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!


BDFL - Memuneh
61310 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12046

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 51762 9-Nov-2006 17:54
Send private message

antigrav: Some of these guys just like to jump on anyone who mentions unlimited data, I really need to start making a file of the stuff they say... 

 
Well, if people want unlimited data for $29.95, then it obviously is not worth even providing the service.

antigrav: Another thing that never gets old: 'Then, a recording emerged of an analyst briefing in which Gattung admitted that Telecom has used confusion as a marketing tool to keep prices up, and showed her naivety about the threat of unbundling by suggesting the government would never be “dumb” enough to proceed with such severe regulation.'


It does get old. I can't see the relationship of this quote with the whole discussion. Or is just trolling?

I would like to invite YOU to create a thread about the Southern Cross Cable.

On immortal words from Samuel L. Jackson's character  Jules Winnfield: "I dare you. I double dare you". Joking of course, in the last sentence.





1 | 2 
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.