They should have given the chch contract to chorus

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › They should have given the chch contract to chorus

hamish225

1430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 215

ID Verified

#111751 14-Nov-2012 00:08

Firstly they seem to be better with their planning, secondly this wouldn't have happened: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/7941841/Tension-rises-in-network-rollout

*Insert big spe*dtest result here*

Zeon

3926 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 759

Trusted

#716747 14-Nov-2012 01:22

I am not sure why crown fibre holdings chose enable over Chorus but I am sure they have their reasons. Enable needs to manage its own relationship with contractors.

Speedtest 2019-10-14

kingjj

1730 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 450

ID Verified

Trusted

#716751 14-Nov-2012 05:31

Enable did already have a relatively large network in Christchurch as well as the local resources, however their organisational and communication skills do need a ramp up. Unless you are in Halswell or Bishopdale/Papanui you're in the dark currently with a roll out time frame. At least Chorus has a clear time line.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#716767 14-Nov-2012 06:34

I can see a lot more of this occuring in the next 18 months to 2 years as the LFC model implodes.

IMHO Chorus are the only player who really understands the true costs of deploying a network and truck rolls to support it.

chevrolux

4962 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2638
Inactive user

#717013 14-Nov-2012 12:53

IMHO Chorus are the only player who really understands the true costs of deploying a network and truck rolls to support it.

Too right!! 'Chorus' have been doing what they do for the last 50+ years and truly do understand how to go about things. They have their short comings but at the end of they day get the job done well. Same problems happened when Visionstream were given the contract in Auckland and they pretty much forced the techs to go owner/operator. If it ain't broke don't fix it!

wellygary

8810 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5287

#717024 14-Nov-2012 13:27

Sigh, I do hope that this is not a case of the Peoples Republic of Christchurch strikes again,

If Enable low balled their contract price and have to wear the overrun,
it will be the poor ratepayers of Christchurch who are gonna cop it is the chops (again)

wired

191 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 72

#717029 14-Nov-2012 13:43

I thought that Enable are using the same contractors as Chorus would have used. So wont they know how to build the network as much as if Chorus was doing it?

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

wellygary

8810 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5287

#717045 14-Nov-2012 14:06

wired: I thought that Enable are using the same contractors as Chorus would have used. So wont they know how to build the network as much as if Chorus was doing it?

The Issue is not the actual work being done by the contractors, but whether Enable have sized the job right,

It appears that they are asking the contractors to install in areas that it appears were assumed would be serviced from Enables existing network.

Now, Assumption is the mother of all F Ups, and this will likely end up in court to work out who is responsible for the additional work that Transfield appears to be doing.

Beccara

1473 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 517

ID Verified

#717474 15-Nov-2012 08:50

sbiddle: I can see a lot more of this occuring in the next 18 months to 2 years as the LFC model implodes.

IMHO Chorus are the only player who really understands the true costs of deploying a network and truck rolls to support it.

I'll let the lines companies know deploying in the NI that they dont know how to deploy and manage a network

Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated