Copper shutdown post 2020 proposed

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › Copper shutdown post 2020 proposed

DarkShadow

1601 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 645

# 208451 12-Feb-2017 18:25

Review of Telecommunications Act 2001

Main points:

Copper: no longer regulated in fibre areas. So that means price can be increased or the whole network shutdown. Outside fibre areas copper still regulated, price capped at 2019 levels.

Fibre: only Chorus will be regulated. Revenue cap plus price cap on anchor products. Two anchor products: 100/20 and voice only. LFCs not subject to price regulation. GPON unbundling available, but no price cap.

1 | 2 | 3

2107 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1180

# 1719047 12-Feb-2017 18:39

3 people support this post

How could it possibly be OK to only regulate Chorus fibre? Doesn't sound fair OR legal to me.

Location: Dunedin

richms

22049 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4680

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1719049 12-Feb-2017 18:40

Because they own the copper that will be getting turned off in those areas, so have an incentive to not compete with themselves when putting fiber in, whereas the other LFCs will be all over making the copper network redundant. Chorus can just go "meh, too hard" and leave the copper on and still get money?

Richard rich.ms

DarthKermit

4774 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2723

Trusted

# 1719050 12-Feb-2017 18:43

Switched off our copper over a year ago.

k1w1k1d

563 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 194

# 1719051 12-Feb-2017 18:47

How long will it be economically viable for Chorus to maintain copper lines as more and more users switch to fibre?

Walking along our dead end street it looks like about 18 of the 30 houses have fibre. A few houses have even had the copper disconnected from the house and the wires are twisted around the power poles.

andrewNZ

2107 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1180

# 1719052 12-Feb-2017 18:49

I meant to say it should ALL be regulated. What's to stop other providers upping the price when copper is pulled.

Fibre: only Chorus will be regulated. Revenue cap plus price cap on anchor products. Two anchor products: 100/20 and voice only.

Doesn't sound like an incentive to replace copper to me, quite the opposite.

Location: Dunedin

alasta

4301 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 849

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1719055 12-Feb-2017 18:58

4 people support this post

Setting a drop dead date for copper is a good idea because it will put pressure on landlords to get fibre into their properties. At the moment a lot of them are probably thinking that it's just too hard.

DarkShadow

1601 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 645

# 1719058 12-Feb-2017 19:11

andrewNZ:

Fibre: only Chorus will be regulated. Revenue cap plus price cap on anchor products. Two anchor products: 100/20 and voice only.

Doesn't sound like an incentive to replace copper to me, quite the opposite.

You missed the part where copper prices are not regulated inside fibre areas.

If an area has no fibre Chorus can only charged the capped price for copper.

When Chorus build fibre in a copper, they can charge whatever prices they like for copper in that area.

Also, the fibre revenue cap is calculated roughly like this:

maximum allowable revenue = total capital invested in fibre * x% (where x is yet to be defined)

This means the more they invest in fibre, the more revenue they are allowed to take in.

andrewNZ: I meant to say it should ALL be regulated. What's to stop other providers upping the price when copper is pulled.

Chorus doesn't have incentive to pull copper in places where another company has fibre. On the contrary they might upgrade the copper further to compete.

richms

22049 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4680

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1719066 12-Feb-2017 19:35

8 people support this post

alasta:

Setting a drop dead date for copper is a good idea because it will put pressure on landlords to get fibre into their properties. At the moment a lot of them are probably thinking that it's just too hard.

Only if they remove any ability for neighbours, body corps and others from impeding a copper for fiber direct swap out. Once that can happen, and installs are at a realistic timeframe in an area then let them go for gold with the copper price hikes and removal. When even one person in the area is unable to move to fiber either because chorus call it too hard to install or whatever then keep the copper prices down.

Richard rich.ms

yitz

1358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 319

# 1719093 12-Feb-2017 20:59

^ yes I believe that is all considered in the proposal under the "minimum customer protection requirements"

http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/technology-communications/communications/regulating-the-telecommunications-sector/review-of-the-telecommunications-act-2001/further-consultation-on-fixed-line-communications-services/regulatory-impact-statement.pdf#page=28

Also I thought we would be getting 100/50 by 2019 how come it is now 100/20.

Lias

3699 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2166

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1719139 12-Feb-2017 23:32

Opinions after a brief read is that it must have been written by Chrous and them the MBIE branding put on, because it's sure as heck not consumer friendly.

Ditching the TSO can't be permitted, sure it could do with some updates, but free local calling and regulated low prices must stay. The TSO exists to protect consumers wallets, not line chorus shareholders.

Chorus should only be allowed to withdraw copper by attrition (e.g. not accepting new customers in fibre areas). They should not be able to withdraw services if customers wish to retain them. MBIE saying that noone will be using copper based alarm/health monitoring equipment or faxes in 2020 is wishful thinking. I could possibly be persuaded to let Chorus withdraw services if it upgrades any equipment not compatible with fibre/VOIP at it's cost (e.g. give people new alarm systems), but even then I'm not really keen.

Really feels like it's a proposal for more government welfare for Chorus, not a proposal to protect the interests of consumers.

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

SaltyNZ

4891 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2393

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1719166 13-Feb-2017 07:06

5 people support this post

"Free local calling" is not free local calling. It's unlimited local calling for $50-ish a month assuming you only have a landline and nothing else. For around the same price you can get unlimited calling to anywhere in NZ and Australia on mobile. There may still be the 0.1% population who have a copper phone line and can't get mobile service right now, but if they're that far out that they still won't have mobile service in 2020 then they're probably better off with satellite. If you're in an area where Chorus is withdrawing copper because they have fibre, you are not that 0.1%.

I'm all for letting Chorus withdraw copper wherever they've got fibre. If were up to me I'd be aiming to have every copper service converted to fibre by 2020!

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone XS + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

richms

22049 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4680

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1719168 13-Feb-2017 07:35

2 people support this post

Was there this many people upset when telex service went away that people would have to upgrade to fax machines?

Richard rich.ms

Lias

3699 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2166

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1719206 13-Feb-2017 08:37

Honestly the changes don't really impact me personally, for my needs I could care less.. However it is likely to have a disproportionate impact on the poor and the elderly who's needs are vastly different from mine, and I see no good reason why Chorus should be allowed to save money at their expense.

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

richms

22049 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4680

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1719212 13-Feb-2017 08:47

If there is an issue with poor people then it should be addressed thru work and income, they already provide funding for a phone for people who are job seeking and do not have one. Not up to chorus to operate as a charity to these people when it is something the welfare state should be providing.

Richard rich.ms

Lias

3699 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2166

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1719215 13-Feb-2017 08:55

One person supports this post

richms:

If there is an issue with poor people then it should be addressed thru work and income, they already provide funding for a phone for people who are job seeking and do not have one. Not up to chorus to operate as a charity to these people when it is something the welfare state should be providing.

I don't think I could disagree more. I've been calling for Telecom, and then post split Chorus, to be run as a not for profit community trust like various lines trusts for years. At a minimum as long as they have a government issued monopoly (or near monopoly) they should be regulated to limit profits, and put consumers first. Any day a Chorus shareholder is happy, is not a good day for the people of NZ.

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

1 | 2 | 3