«

SchoolTech wrote:
> 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.

That would be a more defensible position if Telecom had not, on Theresa
Gattung's own admission, engaged in years of price gouging and
deliberately confusing the public.

Telecom is getting what it deserved, and should face further
investigation now for misleading investors over the underlying value of
the company.

Telecom had its chance and blew it. That's a shame for the customers and
a shame for Telecom's investors too, but the company brought the
regulation down on its own head by its unacceptable behavior.

Philip

SchoolTech <> wrote:

>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.

Well the rest of the world has LLU except for Mexico and the world
hasn't come to an end.. neither have the telcos..

SchoolTech wrote:
> 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.

You are saying that Telecom should be forced to sell their local loop
assets, and taxpayer funds should be used to buy it.
Then Telecom would lose the whole POTS telephone service business,
rather than just provide access to the local loop twisted pair
distribution frame for ISP ADSL termination equipment.
Can you explain any advantages to anyone in this novel arrangement ?