regulator rule against local loop unbundling

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Chris, Dec 22, 2003.

  1. Chris

    Chris Guest

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870

    "In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local loop"
    or copper wire network to competitors."

    They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's

    --
    Chris

    "Two men walk into a bar. You'd think the second one would've ducked..."
    Chris, Dec 22, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Chris

    JedMeister Guest

    Not all doom and gloom yet...the last paragraph which is now the key to
    price lowering...

    ....Telecom be required to provide new entrants with a wholesale DSL service
    to allow entrants to develop and offer to consumers their own range of
    broadband products.

    But will this be sufficient, especially if telecom sets the wholesale
    prices? The decision will aid Telecom in delaying cheap broadband for years.

    "Chris" <> wrote in message
    news:IyLFb.14155$...
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >
    > "In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    > Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local

    loop"
    > or copper wire network to competitors."
    >
    > They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's
    >
    > --
    > Chris
    >
    > "Two men walk into a bar. You'd think the second one would've ducked..."
    JedMeister, Dec 23, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Chris

    T.N.O. Guest

    JedMeister wrote:
    > ...Telecom be required to provide new entrants with a wholesale DSL service
    > to allow entrants to develop and offer to consumers their own range of
    > broadband products.


    you cut the words "and is recommending that" from just before your
    quoting starts...

    It is only a recommendation, not a necessity.

    Looks like those shares I bought in Telecom are a good and safe
    investment for a while yet.
    T.N.O., Dec 23, 2003
    #3
  4. Chris

    JedMeister Guest

    True :)

    "T.N.O." <> wrote in message
    news:bs832h$9me4o$-berlin.de...
    > JedMeister wrote:
    > > ...Telecom be required to provide new entrants with a wholesale DSL

    service
    > > to allow entrants to develop and offer to consumers their own range of
    > > broadband products.

    >
    > you cut the words "and is recommending that" from just before your
    > quoting starts...
    >
    > It is only a recommendation, not a necessity.
    >
    > Looks like those shares I bought in Telecom are a good and safe
    > investment for a while yet.
    >
    JedMeister, Dec 23, 2003
    #4
  5. Chris

    Warwick Guest

    On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 13:42:25 +1300, T.N.O. wrote:

    > JedMeister wrote:
    >> ...Telecom be required to provide new entrants with a wholesale DSL service
    >> to allow entrants to develop and offer to consumers their own range of
    >> broadband products.

    >
    > you cut the words "and is recommending that" from just before your
    > quoting starts...
    >
    > It is only a recommendation, not a necessity.
    >
    > Looks like those shares I bought in Telecom are a good and safe
    > investment for a while yet.


    Looks like the commerce commission have significant funds invested in
    Telecom as well if you ask me.
    What a fucking brain dead decision.

    cheers
    Warwick
    Warwick, Dec 23, 2003
    #5
  6. In article <IyLFb.14155$>,
    Chris <> wrote:

    >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >
    >"In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    >Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local loop"
    >or copper wire network to competitors."
    >
    >They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's


    Bugger. I was rather hoping for something like unbundling to drive down
    my ADSL bill...

    I thought this had been tried successfully in other countries? Why did
    the Commerce Commission decide that it would be impractical here?
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Dec 23, 2003
    #6
  7. On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:58:32 GMT, Chris <> wrote:

    >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >
    >"In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    >Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local loop"
    >or copper wire network to competitors."


    I've uploaded tomorrow's edition of Aardark half a day early to
    comment on this outrageous recommendation on the part of the CC.


    --
    you can contact me via http://aardvark.co.nz/contact/
    Bruce Simpson, Dec 23, 2003
    #7
  8. Chris

    Carl Elphick Guest

    "Bruce Simpson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:58:32 GMT, Chris <> wrote:
    >
    > >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    > >
    > >"In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    > >Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local

    loop"
    > >or copper wire network to competitors."

    >
    > I've uploaded tomorrow's edition of Aardark half a day early to
    > comment on this outrageous recommendation on the part of the CC.


    My feeling almost is, I'll vote for whatever political party in the next
    election that makes it a policy to unbundle, guess my DSL bill will never
    get any cheaper.
    Carl Elphick, Dec 23, 2003
    #8
  9. Chris

    Craig Shore Guest

    On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 16:36:49 +1300, Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
    <_zealand> wrote:

    >In article <IyLFb.14155$>,
    > Chris <> wrote:
    >
    >>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >>
    >>"In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    >>Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local loop"
    >>or copper wire network to competitors."
    >>
    >>They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's

    >
    >Bugger. I was rather hoping for something like unbundling to drive down
    >my ADSL bill...


    Driving up the speed and monthly data allowance would be better than
    driving down the price.
    Craig Shore, Dec 23, 2003
    #9
  10. In article <cZRFb.14185$>, "Carl Elphick" <> wrote:
    >
    >"Bruce Simpson" <> wrote in message
    >news:...

    *SNIP*
    >My feeling almost is, I'll vote for whatever political party in the next
    >election that makes it a policy to unbundle, guess my DSL bill will never
    >get any cheaper.
    >

    You're kinda fucked then. National won't, because their IT spokesman is
    clueless and seems to have his head firmly in Telescum's collective
    rectum. Plus Government intervention, even when it's in the absolute
    best interests of the country, isn't their thing.
    Labour looked like they actually had a spine, but like every other
    political party when it comes to real action they're all talk.

    --
    Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
    "Veni, vidi, velcro...
    I came, I saw, I stuck around"

    My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
    Matthew Poole, Dec 23, 2003
    #10
  11. Chris

    steve Guest

    On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:58:32 +0000, Chris wrote:

    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >
    > "In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    > Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local loop"
    > or copper wire network to competitors."
    >
    > They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's


    .....and was there ever any doubt?

    Seriously......

    Now Telecom can continue to dance the 'delay-forever two-step' - as they
    always have....

    It took them over 3 years to bring IP-Net to the market....and that was
    after their nrand new ISP, Xtra, had "trialled" it for most of a year.

    Commissioner Webb was clearly either pulling our leg before....or he had
    his own chain pulled.
    steve, Dec 23, 2003
    #11
  12. Chris

    steve Guest

    On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 10:00:17 +0000, Matthew Poole wrote:

    > In article <cZRFb.14185$>, "Carl Elphick" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>"Bruce Simpson" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...

    > *SNIP*
    >>My feeling almost is, I'll vote for whatever political party in the next
    >>election that makes it a policy to unbundle, guess my DSL bill will never
    >>get any cheaper.
    >>

    > You're kinda fucked then. National won't, because their IT spokesman is
    > clueless and seems to have his head firmly in Telescum's collective
    > rectum. Plus Government intervention, even when it's in the absolute
    > best interests of the country, isn't their thing.
    > Labour looked like they actually had a spine, but like every other
    > political party when it comes to real action they're all talk.


    Um....Green's aren't all talk. That's why some people don't like them.
    They mean business.
    steve, Dec 23, 2003
    #12
  13. In article <>, steve <> wrote:
    >On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 10:00:17 +0000, Matthew Poole wrote:

    *SNIP*
    >Um....Green's aren't all talk. That's why some people don't like them.
    >They mean business.


    Yes, the Greens are about the only political party who consistently
    stand by their beliefs. It's a shame their beliefs and my beliefs are
    sufficiently non-convergent that they're not an option for me.

    --
    Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
    "Veni, vidi, velcro...
    I came, I saw, I stuck around"

    My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
    Matthew Poole, Dec 23, 2003
    #13
  14. Chris

    Bret Guest

    On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 19:53:23 GMT, (Matthew Poole)
    wrote:

    >In article <>, steve <> wrote:
    >>On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 10:00:17 +0000, Matthew Poole wrote:

    >*SNIP*
    >>Um....Green's aren't all talk. That's why some people don't like them.
    >>They mean business.

    >
    >Yes, the Greens are about the only political party who consistently
    >stand by their beliefs. It's a shame their beliefs and my beliefs are
    >sufficiently non-convergent that they're not an option for me.


    What happened to bringing down the government over GE?
    Bret, Dec 23, 2003
    #14
  15. Chris

    SNOman Guest

    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    > In article <IyLFb.14155$>,
    > Chris <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >>
    >>"In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    >>Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local loop"
    >>or copper wire network to competitors."
    >>
    >>They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's

    >
    >
    > Bugger. I was rather hoping for something like unbundling to drive down
    > my ADSL bill...
    >
    > I thought this had been tried successfully in other countries? Why did
    > the Commerce Commission decide that it would be impractical here?


    It's not just the ADSL either. Unbundling would have meant that you
    could pay your monthly phone bill to someone else and never have to deal
    with Telescum again.
    SNOman, Dec 23, 2003
    #15
  16. Chris

    samg Guest

    Chris <> wrote in
    news:IyLFb.14155$:

    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >
    > "In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    > Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local
    > loop" or copper wire network to competitors."
    >
    > They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's
    >


    from stuff
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2766441a13,00.html

    'The wholesale service Telecom had to offer was only 256 kilobits
    downstream, at the low end of the speeds broadband transmission could
    achieve'.

    So most likely nothing will change, at best itll be about $5 a month
    cheaper.
    samg, Dec 23, 2003
    #16
  17. Chris

    harry Guest

    SNOman wrote:
    > Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    >> In article <IyLFb.14155$>,
    >> Chris <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >>>
    >>> "In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    >>> Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its
    >>> "local loop" or copper wire network to competitors."
    >>>
    >>> They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's

    >>
    >>
    >> Bugger. I was rather hoping for something like unbundling to drive
    >> down my ADSL bill...
    >>
    >> I thought this had been tried successfully in other countries? Why
    >> did the Commerce Commission decide that it would be impractical here?

    >
    > It's not just the ADSL either. Unbundling would have meant that you
    > could pay your monthly phone bill to someone else and never have to
    > deal with Telescum again.


    :)
    Except if you want them to list your mobile number
    harry, Dec 23, 2003
    #17
  18. Chris

    Mutlley Guest

    SNOman <> wrote:

    >Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    >> In article <IyLFb.14155$>,
    >> Chris <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >>>
    >>>"In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    >>>Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local loop"
    >>>or copper wire network to competitors."
    >>>
    >>>They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's

    >>
    >>
    >> Bugger. I was rather hoping for something like unbundling to drive down
    >> my ADSL bill...
    >>
    >> I thought this had been tried successfully in other countries? Why did
    >> the Commerce Commission decide that it would be impractical here?

    >
    >It's not just the ADSL either. Unbundling would have meant that you
    >could pay your monthly phone bill to someone else and never have to deal
    >with Telescum again.


    That would depend if the some else is just reselling Telecom dial
    tone. If that's what your thinking, no thanx..
    Mutlley, Dec 23, 2003
    #18
  19. Chris

    Warwick Guest

    On 24 Dec 2003 10:21:37 +1300, samg wrote:

    > Chris <> wrote in
    > news:IyLFb.14155$:
    >
    >> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3540870
    >>
    >> "In an about-face on its earlier draft determination, the Commerce
    >> Commission today said Telecom should not be forced to open its "local
    >> loop" or copper wire network to competitors."
    >>
    >> They think telecom should provide wholesale DSL to ISP's
    >>

    >
    > from stuff
    > http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2766441a13,00.html
    >
    > 'The wholesale service Telecom had to offer was only 256 kilobits
    > downstream, at the low end of the speeds broadband transmission could
    > achieve'.
    >
    > So most likely nothing will change, at best itll be about $5 a month
    > cheaper.


    Ive written them and asked them to disclose the extent of commission
    members shareholdings in Telecom. I said it would be helpful to rule out
    personal financial gain from what is otherwise a very puzzling decision.

    I will post any replies in due course.

    I guess I will go back to broadband when they finish laying the new fibre
    in Lower Hutt.


    btw- I went to stuff. It popped up an AmexCard image directly over the type
    I was reading. It waits for you to read the article then it pops up over
    the text. **** that - I scroll down to read past it - the fucking image
    responds to the mouse wheel and rolls down the page preventing anything
    being read until you have been exposed to a full 10 seconds of AMEX image.

    I find that fucking intrusive. The least they could have done is made the
    image transparent. Wankers.



    cheers
    Warwick
    Warwick, Dec 24, 2003
    #19
  20. "Carl Elphick" <> wrote in message
    news:cZRFb.14185$...
    > My feeling almost is, I'll vote for whatever political party in the next
    > election that makes it a policy to unbundle, guess my DSL bill will never
    > get any cheaper.
    >



    [ ] None of the Above. Personally I have had enough, I'm not just concern
    at the broadband issue either (which is only a small portion of my
    concerns),

    If there are clear signs that lack of broadband is becoming a major issue to
    the point that it is clearing inhibiting my day to day activities and/or
    severely inhibiting the Nation's economic growth and general health of the
    Nation further down the track. I guess I'll just have to immigrate, but I
    am crossing my fingers that it doesn't and that comcom has in fact made a
    reasonable decision.

    At this point in time, Broadband for me is not an absolute necessity, But am
    concern at how the overall Business, Education etc may be affected by
    continuing astronomical broadband charges and the consequences to the Nation
    as a whole.
    Alpine Dragon, Dec 24, 2003
    #20
    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. Ralph D.

    Voltage Regulator?????

    Ralph D., Nov 9, 2003, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    366
    Ralph D.
    Nov 9, 2003
  2. Kevin Panzke
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    329
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64]
    Jul 12, 2005
  3. ian field

    Slightly OT: Ofcom (UK telco regulator).

    ian field, May 30, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    502
    ian field
    May 30, 2007
  4. news.xtra.co.nz
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    725
    Gavin & Sandy
    May 5, 2006
  5. Blig Merk
    Replies:
    66
    Views:
    1,744
    StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt
    Apr 27, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page