I think that the timing of this announcement is a vote bribe, but in saying that I do agree with it and I think we all knew that it was going to happen one day - particular in the sorts of places that would have a similar per-capita rollout cost to the current UFB footprint
I am worried that under labour, that they would protentially stop UFB and try and recontract it etc. Just to prove a point since UFB is nationals baby.
Sounddude: UFB is one of the reasons I am voting national.
I am worried that under labour, that they would protentially stop UFB and try and recontract it etc. Just to prove a point since UFB is nationals baby.
I don't think the program would be messed about with much under Labour. The Chorus contract is being re-negotiated in 2016 I understand, and the roll out after that is dependent on certain conditions being met - % uptake etc. Possibly Labour would be more critical in those negotiations, and pushing the Commerce Commission to move against the 'copper tax'. Personally I am in favour of keeping a form of the 'copper tax' to make UFB more attractive, at least in areas where UFB is available.
Sounddude: UFB is one of the reasons I am voting national.
I am worried that under labour, that they would protentially stop UFB and try and recontract it etc. Just to prove a point since UFB is nationals baby.
I doubt that they would stop it since: - Northpower have already finished their rollout and UFF will finish in about 18 months. That only leave Enable and Chorus to ticker with. - Labour policy is to improve Internet access particularly in the regions. - This is obtained more forward movement than Labour's previous Broadband Investment Fund (BIF) project where they were going to rollout fibre. - If UFB is successful then the government gets lots of the $1.35bn back into their coffers. If its not successful, then they get paid dividends from the LFCs. either way they get money back.
However, they will probably try and renegotiate something.
Sounddude: UFB is one of the reasons I am voting national.
I am worried that under labour, that they would protentially stop UFB and try and recontract it etc. Just to prove a point since UFB is nationals baby.
I doubt that they would stop it since: - Northpower have already finished their rollout and UFF will finish in about 18 months. That only leave Enable and Chorus to ticker with. - Labour policy is to improve Internet access particularly in the regions. - This is obtained more forward movement than Labour's previous Broadband Investment Fund (BIF) project where they were going to rollout fibre. - If UFB is successful then the government gets lots of the $1.35bn back into their coffers. If its not successful, then they get paid dividends from the LFCs. either way they get money back.
However, they will probably try and renegotiate something.
Traditionally they dont like new infrastructure and for 9 years let a lot of it fall behind the pace of life especially roading in areas like Auckland. Usually if they see a desperate need for social spending it will be at the expense of infrastructure such as roads anf UFB.
Sounddude: UFB is one of the reasons I am voting national.
I am worried that under labour, that they would protentially stop UFB and try and recontract it etc. Just to prove a point since UFB is nationals baby.
I doubt that they would stop it since: - Northpower have already finished their rollout and UFF will finish in about 18 months. That only leave Enable and Chorus to ticker with. - Labour policy is to improve Internet access particularly in the regions. - This is obtained more forward movement than Labour's previous Broadband Investment Fund (BIF) project where they were going to rollout fibre. - If UFB is successful then the government gets lots of the $1.35bn back into their coffers. If its not successful, then they get paid dividends from the LFCs. either way they get money back.
However, they will probably try and renegotiate something.
Traditionally they dont like new infrastructure and for 9 years let a lot of it fall behind the pace of life especially roading in areas like Auckland. Usually if they see a desperate need for social spending it will be at the expense of infrastructure such as roads anf UFB.
Wait so are we saying fibre into the home is more important than warm and dry housing?
For those at the lower end of the economic spectrum keeping healthy with a nice warm, dry house with food in the kitchen whilst operating internet on a "mere" DSL connection is more appropriate than fibre to 85% of the homes in NZ.
I guess some people have different priorities based on how well off they are currently.
alexj: Wait so are we saying fibre into the home is more important than warm and dry housing?
For those at the lower end of the economic spectrum keeping healthy with a nice warm, dry house with food in the kitchen whilst operating internet on a "mere" DSL connection is more appropriate than fibre to 85% of the homes in NZ.
I guess some people have different priorities based on how well off they are currently.
That's a silly comparison...
Home owners or landlords can install or arrange to install insulation and heatpumps etc relatively cheaply themselves, there are even existing government subsidies for it.
Fibre to the home is infrastructure like power lines or water mains and is built by the utility provider as part of the overall network, cost is much higher. Fibre is a once in a generation infrastructure upgrade.
alexj: Wait so are we saying fibre into the home is more important than warm and dry housing?
For those at the lower end of the economic spectrum keeping healthy with a nice warm, dry house with food in the kitchen whilst operating internet on a "mere" DSL connection is more appropriate than fibre to 85% of the homes in NZ.
I guess some people have different priorities based on how well off they are currently.
I think it is more important. I can choose to make my house warm and dry. I cant choose to have fiber installed in the street without paying 5 digits for a commercial internet connection install (I have asked, not happy with that answer)
A majority of people complaining about cold damp housing do nothing to solve it and expect the landlords to solve it.
Or they are like the tenants who rent the house next door to me. The complained that the house was cold and damp. I asked them why don't you move to a better house? They said that the rent was cheap.
So you lot are saying that renovating your house to have better insulation is cheaper than installing fibre at "5 digit" prices? I have no idea about the amounts but I wouldn't mind some rough estimates to see if your math works out. Aaaanywho... I would like to see the the benefits of healthy homes vs "gigatown" houses. I understand fibre is fabulous to have but I still believe that it is a luxury and not a necessity (in 2014) like some people claim. Yes, it is infrastructure but when it comes to central government funding/taxation the cost/benefit of healthy homes surely must outweigh broadband fast enough to download all your favourite game of thrones episodes in 1080p while you hold your breath!
All for the warm and dry home stuff - great payback over time and I too would put this first.
I think the argument with fibre is that there is no way a single person could get fibre without someone doing the build. five figures is not even close - Fibre from my house in west to somewhere? Not possible.
And Fibre is not just for torrenting.. that is a very narrow view. Teleworking, Hosting apps and services all the infra to enable the information economy we keep harping on about.
Edit: This conversation is veering wildly off course (on geekzone, NEVER!) - but insulation is an interesting issue. From when I looked there are subsidies specifically for landlords to insulate homes for renters, as well as the subsidies for people insulating their home. I think subsidy (vs paying for the whole thing) is the way to go - require some investment from the owner to add value.
There will always be landlords who don't spend money and don't care as long as the rent is paid and there will always be awesome landlords too. I guess the free market economic theory would expect people who don't look after their rentals to have trouble finding and keeping tenants, but the current bonkers rental market (particularly in Auckland) kind of breaks that.
My point (if I had one) was that whilst some people are moaning about fibre to the premise there are those in this country who are struggling with MUCH worse circumstances than lack of bandwidth and/or latency. If it was up to me (and thank FSM it is not) the rollout would proceed but they should closely monitor the uptake then slowly raise install costs.
Lately I am hearing that more and more often during UFB applications customers are being asked for contributions towards fibre builds. Even a year ago this was very very rare and the feasibility of the UFB rollout seems to balance on the edge or uptake and economic feasibility.
- Northpower have already finished their rollout and UFF will finish in about 18 months. That only leave Enable and Chorus to ticker with.
Enable (the subcontractors rather) are quite fast in Chch in terms of rolling out the fibre, however one gripe is they have very limited information available to service providers and the public.
wired:
- Labour policy is to improve Internet access particularly in the regions.
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.
Trusted
2degrees
