«

Evening all,

I agree with most posters here that LLU is a good thing. this will
give other ISPs/Telcos the opprtunity to sell their services to us.
However, one thing needs some thought!! While the Local Loop has been
unbundled WHO OWNS IT AND MAINTAINS IT?

Unless the upcoming legislation changes anything, TELECOM STILL OWNS
THE LOOP. That means that maintenance/upgrades will still proceed at
the same rate as at present (if not slower.)

Having worked in the telecommunications industry for 37 years this
month (including 30 years for Telecom) I would expect a "slow down" on
LL maintenance. This would then allow Telecom to say "LLU hasn't
worked, we need to be in complete control so that we can maintain it
to a standard to support the services that we will provide."

Cheers, Rhino

I would've thought that one of the conditions of using the LL is to
contribute to its maintenance/upgrade. Kinda like how homeowners pay
rates, vehicle owners pay road tax etc. ISPs would just pass that onto
customers (which is what Telecom do anyway) but at least that ensures
that we're not dependent on Telecom to maintain it (and that would be
unfair on them, as much as I hate to say it).

Kris

On Thu, 04 May 2006 20:16:22 +1200, Rhino <> wrote:

>Evening all,
>
>I agree with most posters here that LLU is a good thing. this will
>give other ISPs/Telcos the opprtunity to sell their services to us.
>However, one thing needs some thought!! While the Local Loop has been
>unbundled WHO OWNS IT AND MAINTAINS IT?
>
>Unless the upcoming legislation changes anything, TELECOM STILL OWNS
>THE LOOP. That means that maintenance/upgrades will still proceed at
>the same rate as at present (if not slower.)
>
>Having worked in the telecommunications industry for 37 years this
>month (including 30 years for Telecom) I would expect a "slow down" on
>LL maintenance. This would then allow Telecom to say "LLU hasn't
>worked, we need to be in complete control so that we can maintain it
>to a standard to support the services that we will provide."

But when you look at what ihug want to acheive, from memory it was to build a
customer base using LLU then eventually do their own cabels to the gate.

On Thu, 04 May 2006 20:16:22 +1200, Rhino wrote:

> Evening all,
>
> I agree with most posters here that LLU is a good thing. this will
> give other ISPs/Telcos the opprtunity to sell their services to us.
> However, one thing needs some thought!! While the Local Loop has been
> unbundled WHO OWNS IT AND MAINTAINS IT?
>
> Unless the upcoming legislation changes anything, TELECOM STILL OWNS
> THE LOOP. That means that maintenance/upgrades will still proceed at
> the same rate as at present (if not slower.)
>
> Having worked in the telecommunications industry for 37 years this
> month (including 30 years for Telecom) I would expect a "slow down" on
> LL maintenance. This would then allow Telecom to say "LLU hasn't
> worked, we need to be in complete control so that we can maintain it
> to a standard to support the services that we will provide."
>
> Cheers, Rhino

Didn't British Telecom try these tactics for a while, but ultimately they
"came around" to the idea.

Rhino wrote:
> Evening all,
>
> I agree with most posters here that LLU is a good thing. this will
> give other ISPs/Telcos the opprtunity to sell their services to us.
> However, one thing needs some thought!! While the Local Loop has been
> unbundled WHO OWNS IT AND MAINTAINS IT?
>
> Unless the upcoming legislation changes anything, TELECOM STILL OWNS
> THE LOOP. That means that maintenance/upgrades will still proceed at
> the same rate as at present (if not slower.)
>
> Having worked in the telecommunications industry for 37 years this
> month (including 30 years for Telecom) I would expect a "slow down" on
> LL maintenance. This would then allow Telecom to say "LLU hasn't
> worked, we need to be in complete control so that we can maintain it
> to a standard to support the services that we will provide."
>
> Cheers, Rhino

If the Govn insists on accounting split then Telecom's books will show
the costs and performance....If LL maintenance slips then that gives the
Govn incentive to formally split Telecom up. Also where there is
competition from Clear such tardiness will just cost it even more customers.

Telecom just got bitch slapped today, farting about with LL a second
bigger one IMHO. Dear Teresa wont be able to justify her salary if
telecom gets broken up now will she....

I think there will be enough people watching Telecom for that sort of
behaviour that I dont see how they could survive it....

regards

Thing

"Rhino" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Evening all,
>
> I agree with most posters here that LLU is a good thing. this will
> give other ISPs/Telcos the opprtunity to sell their services to us.
> However, one thing needs some thought!! While the Local Loop has been
> unbundled WHO OWNS IT AND MAINTAINS IT?
>
> Unless the upcoming legislation changes anything, TELECOM STILL OWNS
> THE LOOP. That means that maintenance/upgrades will still proceed at
> the same rate as at present (if not slower.)
>
> Having worked in the telecommunications industry for 37 years this
> month (including 30 years for Telecom) I would expect a "slow down" on
> LL maintenance. This would then allow Telecom to say "LLU hasn't
> worked, we need to be in complete control so that we can maintain it
> to a standard to support the services that we will provide."
>
> Cheers, Rhino

I believe that telecom fully expected for the government to unbundle them.
If not, them Tereasa should lose her job, as they were so far off the mark
on what they were offering compared to what the government expected. BUt it
was predictable that it was eventually going to happen. NOw we have to wait
until late 2007 - early 2008 for the unbundling to fully come into effect.

On Thu, 4 May 2006 22:17:51 +1200, "Vista" <>
wrote:

>
>"Rhino" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> Evening all,
>>
>> I agree with most posters here that LLU is a good thing. this will
>> give other ISPs/Telcos the opprtunity to sell their services to us.
>> However, one thing needs some thought!! While the Local Loop has been
>> unbundled WHO OWNS IT AND MAINTAINS IT?
>>
>> Unless the upcoming legislation changes anything, TELECOM STILL OWNS
>> THE LOOP. That means that maintenance/upgrades will still proceed at
>> the same rate as at present (if not slower.)
>>
>> Having worked in the telecommunications industry for 37 years this
>> month (including 30 years for Telecom) I would expect a "slow down" on
>> LL maintenance. This would then allow Telecom to say "LLU hasn't
>> worked, we need to be in complete control so that we can maintain it
>> to a standard to support the services that we will provide."
>>
>> Cheers, Rhino
>
>I believe that telecom fully expected for the government to unbundle them.
>If not, them Tereasa should lose her job, as they were so far off the mark
>on what they were offering compared to what the government expected. BUt it
>was predictable that it was eventually going to happen. NOw we have to wait
>until late 2007 - early 2008 for the unbundling to fully come into effect.

No, we should immediately lobby the government to get their act
together and get the legislation in place by the end of August, so
that we get LLU going this year. They have overseas legislation to
copy when it comes to drafting. There is no need to wait that long,
and every reason to get LLU going as quickly as possible. And they
need to also let Telecom know that if they are obstructive and try to
hold things up (through the courts and otherwise) as they always have
in the past that the result will be a new bill under urgency overnight
to fix whatever Telecom is trying. Telecom has been warned long ago
to get their act together and produce an acceptable regime. They
acted in as obstructive a manner as they could at all points, and they
should now be given no further chances. Telecommunications and the
Internet is now a critical part of the country's infrastructure, just
as important to our future as roads and water. Telecom can not be
permitted to hold us to ransom any longer.

"Stephen Worthington" <_numbers> wrote in
message news:...
> On Thu, 4 May 2006 22:17:51 +1200, "Vista" <>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Rhino" <> wrote in message
>>news:. ..
>>> Evening all,
>>>
>>> I agree with most posters here that LLU is a good thing. this will
>>> give other ISPs/Telcos the opprtunity to sell their services to us.
>>> However, one thing needs some thought!! While the Local Loop has been
>>> unbundled WHO OWNS IT AND MAINTAINS IT?
>>>
>>> Unless the upcoming legislation changes anything, TELECOM STILL OWNS
>>> THE LOOP. That means that maintenance/upgrades will still proceed at
>>> the same rate as at present (if not slower.)
>>>
>>> Having worked in the telecommunications industry for 37 years this
>>> month (including 30 years for Telecom) I would expect a "slow down" on
>>> LL maintenance. This would then allow Telecom to say "LLU hasn't
>>> worked, we need to be in complete control so that we can maintain it
>>> to a standard to support the services that we will provide."
>>>
>>> Cheers, Rhino
>>
>>I believe that telecom fully expected for the government to unbundle them.
>>If not, them Tereasa should lose her job, as they were so far off the mark
>>on what they were offering compared to what the government expected. BUt
>>it
>>was predictable that it was eventually going to happen. NOw we have to
>>wait
>>until late 2007 - early 2008 for the unbundling to fully come into effect.
>
> No, we should immediately lobby the government to get their act
> together and get the legislation in place by the end of August, so
> that we get LLU going this year. They have overseas legislation to
> copy when it comes to drafting. There is no need to wait that long,
> and every reason to get LLU going as quickly as possible. And they
> need to also let Telecom know that if they are obstructive and try to
> hold things up (through the courts and otherwise) as they always have
> in the past that the result will be a new bill under urgency overnight
> to fix whatever Telecom is trying. Telecom has been warned long ago
> to get their act together and produce an acceptable regime. They
> acted in as obstructive a manner as they could at all points, and they
> should now be given no further chances. Telecommunications and the
> Internet is now a critical part of the country's infrastructure, just
> as important to our future as roads and water. Telecom can not be
> permitted to hold us to ransom any longer.

It isn't telecoms fault, but the governments fault. They never should have
sold a key piece of NZ infrastructure. NZ were one of the first to sell it's
telecommunications infrastructure to a private company in the world, and
they didn't make any provisions in the contract for unbundling as obviously
the internet was pretty much non existent. When aussie sold theirs in 99,
they did unbundle the network, however aussie are still only one place ahead
of NZ in the OECD rankings. I was having a look at the aussie plans on the
market in the APC mag, and eventhough some have now released adsl2 , some
the other companies offering don't look very good, infact some look a lot
worse than telecoms offerings. The costs are about the same as they are in
NZ, although they do have slightly higher traffic allowances, but they are
probably overselling it, which they can do due to larger population.

What may be better is for the government to force the unbundling of
vodafones 3G network, as this is the technology of the future. In two years
telecoms copper network is going to be less relevant to broadband than it is
now.

Rhino wrote:
> Evening all,
>
> I agree with most posters here that LLU is a good thing. this will
> give other ISPs/Telcos the opprtunity to sell their services to us.
> However, one thing needs some thought!! While the Local Loop has been
> unbundled WHO OWNS IT AND MAINTAINS IT?
>
> Unless the upcoming legislation changes anything, TELECOM STILL OWNS
> THE LOOP. That means that maintenance/upgrades will still proceed at
> the same rate as at present (if not slower.)
>
> Having worked in the telecommunications industry for 37 years this
> month (including 30 years for Telecom) I would expect a "slow down" on
> LL maintenance. This would then allow Telecom to say "LLU hasn't
> worked, we need to be in complete control so that we can maintain it
> to a standard to support the services that we will provide."
>
> Cheers, Rhino

Other service providers will buy their access and negotiate an SLA that
defines the standard of service.
Its not rocket science, its easily contracted out.

Rhino wrote:
> Evening all,
>
> I agree with most posters here that LLU is a good thing. this will
> give other ISPs/Telcos the opprtunity to sell their services to us.
> However, one thing needs some thought!! While the Local Loop has been
> unbundled WHO OWNS IT AND MAINTAINS IT?
>
> Unless the upcoming legislation changes anything, TELECOM STILL OWNS
> THE LOOP. That means that maintenance/upgrades will still proceed at
> the same rate as at present (if not slower.)
>
> Having worked in the telecommunications industry for 37 years this
> month (including 30 years for Telecom) I would expect a "slow down" on
> LL maintenance. This would then allow Telecom to say "LLU hasn't
> worked, we need to be in complete control so that we can maintain it
> to a standard to support the services that we will provide."
>
> Cheers, Rhino

Just shows that the whole policy of government is to achieve control
without paying any of the cost.

If they want to control the LL they should buy it back at a fair
commercial price.