Vector's Fibre Network

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Vector's Fibre Network

c3rn

251 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 13

Topic # 57980 3-Mar-2010 11:46

I have noticed that my house is within Vector's existing fibre network. Their 'fibretothedoor.co.nz' site it states:

Unfortunately we can't connect residential properties yet, but if we are successful in our bid to the government Vector will be building a fibre network that will connect residences, businesses, education facilities etc.

My question is since the capability is there, why can't they connect residential properties? Is it a law thing or a cost thing?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

1222 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 146

Reply # 303934 3-Mar-2010 11:52

At the moment its a cost thing. Vector is a wholesaler - local ISP's provide the services to businesses/schools and there is nothing preventing you from paying for the final drop and connectivity providing you wanting to pay business pricing.

When the Local Fibre Companies start to build they will be legally restricted controlling a retailer of services to you - an ISP will likely provide it on a similar wholesaler (VCT)/retailer basis.

There are previous threads when small businesses have had sticker shock at the price for services to connect to Christchurchs fibre provider (Enable).

BartManGeek

187 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 303935 3-Mar-2010 11:54

They want the government to subsidise the cost of the connection so that residential properties don't pay more than what they already pay for their existing 'broadband' Internets.

If Vector were to offer service to residential users at existing rates the residential users would choose to keep their 'cheap' adsl connection

/opinion

/edited for clarity

Try Wrike: fast, easy, and efficient project collaboration software

sbiddle

26202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5800

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 304092 3-Mar-2010 19:15

Fibre is fantastic. it also comes at a singificant cost that I doubt many existing households will be willing to pay.

Forget that $89 ADSL modem - you need an ONT at a bare minimum, probably a new router and a way for a phone service to be delivered - either via the ONT or router or buying new VoIP phones for your house. You'll need significant rewiring in your house - the ONT which will be located at the demarc requires power and you then need to run cat5e cable from this to your router as well as connect existing phone cabling if you wish to reuse existing analogue phones with the ATA. We're talking $500 - $1000 minimum to deploy a solution to a redisential property.

Then factor in the lack of any dialup modem support and MySky (which doesn't have an ethernet option yet for PPV), a potentil upgrade of your house alarm to support IP/internet based monitoring since it may not be compatible with a VoIP line and you're talking about some fairly fundamental changes.

Screeb

671 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 10

Reply # 304099 3-Mar-2010 19:30

sbiddle: Fibre is fantastic. it also comes at a singificant cost that I doubt many existing households will be willing to pay.

Forget that $89 ADSL modem - you need an ONT at a bare minimum, probably a new router and a way for a phone service to be delivered - either via the ONT or router or buying new VoIP phones for your house. You'll need significant rewiring in your house - the ONT which will be located at the demarc requires power and you then need to run cat5e cable from this to your router as well as connect existing phone cabling if you wish to reuse existing analogue phones with the ATA. We're talking $500 - $1000 minimum to deploy a solution to a redisential property.

Then factor in the lack of any dialup modem support and MySky (which doesn't have an ethernet option yet for PPV), a potentil upgrade of your house alarm to support IP/internet based monitoring since it may not be compatible with a VoIP line and you're talking about some fairly fundamental changes.

Yeah, I guess that's why there are no successful residential fibre services anywhere in the world - it's just too darn expensive to get your house set up. And who cares about Government subsidies either - that's not going to help at all! Alright folks, show's over - no one gets FTTH now.

DjShadow

2590 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 348

Trusted

Reply # 304105 3-Mar-2010 19:38

Could we see the usual Telco thing where you pay a cheap joining fee then get locked into a 2-3 year contract?

sbiddle

26202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5800

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 304117 3-Mar-2010 19:56

Screeb:
sbiddle: Fibre is fantastic. it also comes at a singificant cost that I doubt many existing households will be willing to pay.

Forget that $89 ADSL modem - you need an ONT at a bare minimum, probably a new router and a way for a phone service to be delivered - either via the ONT or router or buying new VoIP phones for your house. You'll need significant rewiring in your house - the ONT which will be located at the demarc requires power and you then need to run cat5e cable from this to your router as well as connect existing phone cabling if you wish to reuse existing analogue phones with the ATA. We're talking $500 - $1000 minimum to deploy a solution to a redisential property.

Then factor in the lack of any dialup modem support and MySky (which doesn't have an ethernet option yet for PPV), a potentil upgrade of your house alarm to support IP/internet based monitoring since it may not be compatible with a VoIP line and you're talking about some fairly fundamental changes.

Yeah, I guess that's why there are no successful residential fibre services anywhere in the world - it's just too darn expensive to get your house set up. And who cares about Government subsidies either - that's not going to help at all! Alright folks, show's over - no one gets FTTH now.

I don't think it's true to say there are no succesuful services, Verizon seem to be doing pretty well with FiOS but you have to factor in customers paying up to US$145 per month for service and paying US$80 for installation of the 1st PC and US$90 for each additional PC in the house.

I don't want people to get me wrong - Fibre is brilliant and is now standard spec in all new subdivisons in NZ. I just don't see significant gains in deploying fibre to every house in NZ to deliver a 50Mbps fibre connection when the FTTN network is perfectly capable of delivering that now using VDSL and also slightly more when channel bonding is used.

Vector have absolutely nailed the advertising campaign, it really is a brilliant move.

Screeb

671 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 10

Reply # 304137 3-Mar-2010 20:15

sbiddle:
I don't think it's true to say there are no succesuful services, Verizon seem to be doing pretty well with FiOS but you have to factor in customers paying up to US$145 per month for service and paying US$80 for installation of the 1st PC and US$90 for each additional PC in the house.

What? The PC installation fees, as far as I can tell, are only if you request that Verizon come over and help you get it set up - not compulsary fees, just extra nonsense for those who aren't computer literate (I imagine the "installation" is applying registry patches for XP to change the TCP window size and whatnot).

As for "paying up to US$145 per month", so? You can pay "up to NZ$230 (US$160)" per month on TelstraClear cable if you want. That doesn't tell you anything about the viability of cable. There is also a US$50 FiOS plan and a $65 plan.

I just don't see significant gains in deploying fibre to every house in NZ to deliver a 50Mbps fibre connection when the FTTN network is perfectly capable of delivering that now using VDSL and also slightly more when channel bonding is used.

No one is planning to deploy fibre to every house in NZ. Like I already explained to you in a previous thread, the national fibre plan is about preparing for the future, not the present. xDSL won't last forever, especially over our aging copper network. Not to mention that VDSL is only beneficial over very short distances.

yuxek

147 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

Reply # 304156 3-Mar-2010 20:31

how exactly is vector going to run the fibre anyway? dig up the footpaths? run through drains?

c3rn

251 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 13

Reply # 304174 3-Mar-2010 20:53

So with those costs in mind, how does Vector or a reseller expect residential properties to afford those setup and monthly costs??!!!

DjShadow

2590 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 348

Trusted

Reply # 304183 3-Mar-2010 21:10

yuxek: how exactly is vector going to run the fibre anyway? dig up the footpaths? run through drains?

I would not be suprised if they ask the Council if they can string them overhead

Screeb

671 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 10

Reply # 304197 3-Mar-2010 21:44

yuxek: how exactly is vector going to run the fibre anyway? dig up the footpaths? run through drains?

I don't know about elsewhere, but in Wellington, the mayor/council has said that fiber companies can use the stormwater and sewer pipes.

brad_p: So with those costs in mind, how does Vector or a reseller expect residential properties to afford those setup and monthly costs??!!!

I assume you're referring to sbiddle's posts? One thing he conveniently left out is that having your house wired for fiber increases its value. Once it's done, it's done. Anyway, the installation costs can be subsidised by the Government or by having slightly higher monthly fees / a term contract. Given that FTTH works in other countries despite the high setup cost per house (which is NOT related to density or population - the real cost is basically the same everywhere), there is obviously a business case.

sbiddle

26202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5800

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 304203 3-Mar-2010 22:00

Screeb:
sbiddle:
I don't think it's true to say there are no succesuful services, Verizon seem to be doing pretty well with FiOS but you have to factor in customers paying up to US$145 per month for service and paying US$80 for installation of the 1st PC and US$90 for each additional PC in the house.

What? The PC installation fees, as far as I can tell, are only if you request that Verizon come over and help you get it set up - not compulsary fees, just extra nonsense for those who aren't computer literate (I imagine the "installation" is applying registry patches for XP to change the TCP window size and whatnot).

No the installation charge is for running cat5e cable from the ONT which is typically mounted externally on the house to every PC in the house. If you have existing cabling in your house they will install cable to run to this but the reality is most people don't. They have a single PC with their ADSL modem next to it.

No one is planning to deploy fibre to every house in NZ. Like I already explained to you in a previous thread, the national fibre plan is about preparing for the future, not the present. xDSL won't last forever, especially over our aging copper network. Not to mention that VDSL is only beneficial over very short distances.

The government's long term plan is certainly to have fibre to the majority of houses in NZ within a 10 year timeframe. There is still life left in copper and any customer who is connected to a cabinet will be no further than 2km away, the majority within 800m. With bonded VDSL the current copper network is easily capable of delivering 50Mbps to a significant number of customers.

zCelicaDude

170 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 5

Subscriber

Reply # 304214 3-Mar-2010 22:12

I would stump the funds required for fibre as yes, it adds value to your home...

I have finished networking my whole house with cat6 to every room... and people go thats a good feature that other homes dont have.. and if they have teenagers they go sweet ps3/xbox/pc/laptop will work faster in this house..

So, having fibre installed in your home, for a selling point of view is awesome!

Also, all new houses being built these days (atleast all the houses from 450-700k) have got these Signet ST2000 box's in the garage, which include telephone, tv, networking, power points... so this is where you would stick the OMT, so the post above about expensive installs, isn't a case for new homes/new subdevelopments.

Scott

Zabu

8 posts

Wannabe Geek

Reply # 304217 3-Mar-2010 22:16

Maybe not such a great business case given the picture being painted on fiberevolution.com about FTTH developments in Europe.

sbiddle

26202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5800

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 304231 3-Mar-2010 23:08

zCelicaDude: I would stump the funds required for fibre as yes, it adds value to your home...

I have finished networking my whole house with cat6 to every room... and people go thats a good feature that other homes dont have.. and if they have teenagers they go sweet ps3/xbox/pc/laptop will work faster in this house..

So, having fibre installed in your home, for a selling point of view is awesome!

Also, all new houses being built these days (atleast all the houses from 450-700k) have got these Signet ST2000 box's in the garage, which include telephone, tv, networking, power points... so this is where you would stick the OMT, so the post above about expensive installs, isn't a case for new homes/new subdevelopments.

Scott

And what about every other house? Retrofitting cabling isn't cheap. This is the fundamental issue with deploying fibre to an existing dwelling. It's not like ADSL where the customer can do a self install.

Structured cabling should be a part of *every* house that's built now. It should be standard in the building code, just like double glazing and insulation.

There is also a key difference between fibre adding value to a home and structured cabling adding value to a home. The simple reality is there are very few residential fibre developments anywhere in the world delivering more than 50Mbps to the household. Why? Because there is no need. Copper is perfectly capable of delivering this now.

That's not to say we shouldn't deploy fibre but you have to remember that the difference isn't necessarily one of speed.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4