60 minutes tonight - NZ Broadband story

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Vista, Mar 12, 2006.

  1. Vista

    Vista Guest

    Just wondering what other people thought about this story. I thought it was
    very bland and lacked any new information that I hadn't heard before.
    Vista, Mar 12, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Vista

    Vista Guest

    "Vista" <> wrote in message
    news:1142146341.671956@ftpsrv1...
    > Just wondering what other people thought about this story. I thought it
    > was very bland and lacked any new information that I hadn't heard before.
    >


    Whoops, I meant TV Ones Sunday program, not 60minutes.
    Vista, Mar 12, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Vista

    Zonky Guest

    "Vista" <> wrote in news:1142146341.671956@ftpsrv1:
    > Just wondering what other people thought about this story. I thought
    > it was very bland and lacked any new information that I hadn't heard
    > before.


    i don't believe you can really blame telecom for looking after their own
    interests. Clearly there stratergy is to trickle feed improvements in such
    a way that their impact on revenue is minimised, and realy competition is
    thwarted as long as possible.

    The bad guy here is weak regulation of the monopoly, not the monopoly
    itself.

    Z.



    --
    Please remove my_pants when replying by email.
    Zonky, Mar 12, 2006
    #3
  4. Vista

    Another Rob Guest

    Vista wrote:
    > Just wondering what other people thought about this story. I thought it was
    > very bland and lacked any new information that I hadn't heard before.
    >
    >

    And a story that was targetted at most people here would have been over
    the heads of most of Sundays target audience. Did you really expect
    more than a general backgrounder on a mass-audience news show?
    Another Rob, Mar 12, 2006
    #4
  5. Vista

    Vista Guest

    "Another Rob" <> wrote in message
    news:UJPQf.5724$...
    > Vista wrote:
    >> Just wondering what other people thought about this story. I thought it
    >> was very bland and lacked any new information that I hadn't heard before.

    > And a story that was targetted at most people here would have been over
    > the heads of most of Sundays target audience. Did you really expect more
    > than a general backgrounder on a mass-audience news show?


    Probably not, especially by TVNZ, but it would have been nice if they had
    some new information I hadn't heard before. It was good to see Telecom
    reinforcing the fact that what ihug was willing to invest in the network if
    it was unbundled, is actually what Telecom spends every 10 days ($20
    million).
    Vista, Mar 12, 2006
    #5
  6. Vista

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Vista wrote:
    > Just wondering what other people thought about this story. I thought it was
    > very bland and lacked any new information that I hadn't heard before.
    >
    >


    Are you kidding? I thought Gattung's threat was quite blatant and not
    the kind of thing I'd expect to see in public:

    Her words were to the effect of: "we're going as fast as we can -
    regulatory uncertainty will slow the process down"
    -=rjh=-, Mar 12, 2006
    #6
  7. Vista

    Vista Guest

    "-=rjh=-" <> wrote in message
    news:4413e278$...
    > Vista wrote:
    >> Just wondering what other people thought about this story. I thought it
    >> was very bland and lacked any new information that I hadn't heard before.

    >
    > Are you kidding? I thought Gattung's threat was quite blatant and not the
    > kind of thing I'd expect to see in public:
    >
    > Her words were to the effect of: "we're going as fast as we can -
    > regulatory uncertainty will slow the process down"


    Yes, but I had heard a similar statement before from another interview with
    another telecom spokesman's. I wouldn't really call it a threat..
    Vista, Mar 12, 2006
    #7
  8. In article <1142153384.843012@ftpsrv1>, "Vista" <> wrote:
    >
    >"Another Rob" <> wrote in message
    >news:UJPQf.5724$...
    >> Vista wrote:
    >>> Just wondering what other people thought about this story. I thought it
    >>> was very bland and lacked any new information that I hadn't heard before.

    >> And a story that was targetted at most people here would have been over
    >> the heads of most of Sundays target audience. Did you really expect more
    >> than a general backgrounder on a mass-audience news show?

    >
    >Probably not, especially by TVNZ, but it would have been nice if they had
    >some new information I hadn't heard before. It was good to see Telecom
    >reinforcing the fact that what ihug was willing to invest in the network if
    >it was unbundled, is actually what Telecom spends every 10 days ($20
    >million).


    I too thought the program generally poor. That said, this comment was an off
    hand remark that really needed immediate challenge. They may well "spend"
    that much ... but "invest" ? What are they getting for that money also
    needed defining rather than accepting.
    Figures should have been produced to back that up IMO.


    Bruce

    ----------------------------------------
    I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
    people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
    only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.

    Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett

    Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
    (if there were any)
    Bruce Sinclair, Mar 13, 2006
    #8
  9. On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 22:52:23 +1300, someone purporting to be Vista didst
    scrawl:

    >
    > "Another Rob" <> wrote in message
    > news:UJPQf.5724$...

    *SNIP*
    > some new information I hadn't heard before. It was good to see Telecom
    > reinforcing the fact that what ihug was willing to invest in the network if
    > it was unbundled, is actually what Telecom spends every 10 days ($20
    > million).


    $730m is a pretty paltry re-investment, really. 13% of turnover is quite
    low by international standards.
    Also, that figure from Ihug is what they're ready to spend the moment LLU
    happens. It's not their final investment figure, so how it relates to what
    Telecom (which is a much larger company, too) spends every x days is
    irrelevant.

    --
    Matthew Poole
    "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
    Matthew Poole, Mar 13, 2006
    #9
  10. Vista

    RJ Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 22:52:23 +1300, someone purporting to be Vista didst
    > scrawl:
    >
    > >
    > > "Another Rob" <> wrote in message
    > > news:UJPQf.5724$...

    > *SNIP*
    > > some new information I hadn't heard before. It was good to see Telecom
    > > reinforcing the fact that what ihug was willing to invest in the network if
    > > it was unbundled, is actually what Telecom spends every 10 days ($20
    > > million).

    >
    > $730m is a pretty paltry re-investment, really. 13% of turnover is quite
    > low by international standards.
    > Also, that figure from Ihug is what they're ready to spend the moment LLU
    > happens. It's not their final investment figure, so how it relates to what
    > Telecom (which is a much larger company, too) spends every x days is
    > irrelevant.


    How do you expect then that a much smaller company, Ihug, will be able
    to do better than this?
    RJ, Mar 13, 2006
    #10
  11. On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 14:57:44 +1300, someone purporting to be RJ didst
    scrawl:

    > In article <>,
    > says...

    *SNIP*
    > How do you expect then that a much smaller company, Ihug, will be able
    > to do better than this?


    It's not exactly difficult to do better than what we've currently got.
    $20m buys a lot of networking hardware, especially if you can get a good
    deal from a vendor who's looking to gain a toe-hold in the market.

    All Ihug have to do is get into the market with a good product, start
    selling it, and then leverage that customer base to expand their offering.
    They don't have to compete in every market at once - look at Testicular,
    nee Telstra nee Saturn, for a perfect example of a company that started in
    one market and then grew. Since Ihug won't have to build a whole network
    to compete they'll be able to do even more.

    --
    Matthew Poole
    "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
    Matthew Poole, Mar 13, 2006
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. James

    70-291 Tonight

    James, Aug 25, 2005, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    472
    Oneil
    Oct 23, 2005
  2. Mark Test

    Newsweek Story just that a Story

    Mark Test, May 14, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    659
    Jack Linthicum
    May 22, 2005
  3. PradeepR
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    494
    Dan Evans
    Aug 31, 2006
  4. kena
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    464
  5. GraB

    Broadband story on teletext: 24mb/s?

    GraB, Mar 24, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    408
    MarkH
    Mar 25, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page