LLU is good news, but consider this

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Rhino, May 4, 2006.

  1. Rhino

    Rhino Guest

    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
     
    Rhino, May 4, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rhino

    Guest

    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
     
    , May 4, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Rhino

    Craig Shore Guest

    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.
     
    Craig Shore, May 4, 2006
    #3
  4. 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.
     
    wogers nemesis, May 4, 2006
    #4
  5. Rhino

    thingy Guest

    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
     
    thingy, May 4, 2006
    #5
  6. Rhino

    Vista Guest

    "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.
     
    Vista, May 4, 2006
    #6
  7. 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, May 4, 2006
    #7
  8. Rhino

    Vista Guest

    "Stephen Worthington" <34.nz56.remove_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.
     
    Vista, May 5, 2006
    #8
  9. Rhino

    shannon Guest

    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.
     
    shannon, May 5, 2006
    #9
  10. Rhino

    SchoolTech Guest

    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.
     
    SchoolTech, May 10, 2006
    #10
  11. Rhino

    Philip Guest

    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
     
    Philip, May 11, 2006
    #11
  12. Rhino

    Mutlley Guest

    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..
     
    Mutlley, May 11, 2006
    #12
  13. Rhino

    shannon Guest

    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 ?
     
    shannon, May 11, 2006
    #13
    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. News Reader
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    382
    Flyer
    Mar 31, 2007
  2. News Reader
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    586
    News Reader
    Jul 30, 2007
  3. Uncle StoatWarbler

    Timing of the LLU decision press release

    Uncle StoatWarbler, Dec 26, 2003, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    524
    Brendan
    Dec 28, 2003
  4. Bling Bling

    LLU in the UK

    Bling Bling, Oct 19, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    404
    Bling Bling
    Oct 19, 2005
  5. Bobs
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    787
    Stephen Worthington
    Jun 1, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page