TelstraClear broadband

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by peterwn, Sep 19, 2010.

  1. peterwn

    peterwn Guest

    TelstraClear has kicked off a publicity campaign to persuade the
    Government to stop or slow down broadband rollout in areas where it
    has its cable system. At first glance it does seem sensible to
    concentrate the rollout to areas where people have access to no better
    than ADSL (copper pair) broadband. Possibly, the coax cable system is
    doomed in due course.

    For broadband, coax cable is superior to copper pairs but will remain
    inferior to fibre optic. The key thing that drives capacity for a coax
    cable system is the cable length and number of customers served.
    Capacity and speed can be increased by extending the fibre optic
    'overlay' on the cable network, in other words a continuing capital
    investment in coaxial 'heads' and limited fibre optic extensions. The
    cost would be far smaller than 'last mile' fibre to each customer. For
    schools, libraries, etc, where fibre is desirable only limited fibre
    extensions would be needed to connect either to TelstraClear or
    Telecom fibre.

    However there has been and to some extent still is customer irritation
    at TelstraClear which would count against allowing it a 'priviliged'
    situation. But IMO it would be far better for the Government and
    TelstraClear to sort these out so broadband investment can go where it
    is really needed.

    As I see it, irritations past and present would be:
    1. Poor customer interaction.
    2. Forced bundling of phone service (but I think they now have some
    'bare' broadband plans).
    3. Network bottlenecking (when overlay investment lags increasing
    demand).
    4. Ridiculously high 'overuse' charges in the past.
    5. Apparent over zealous caching of web pages on their servers so
    customers are fed out of date pages.
    6. 'Landing' charges when other NZ ISP's etc send pages to
    TelstraClear customers (who also pay to receive pages). Citylink in
    Wellington for example blocked services such as 'mirror' servers and
    webcams to TelstraClear because of 'landing' charges whereas
    originally the TelstraClear service in Wellington was 'peered' with
    Citylink etc with nil data charges.
    7. Exploitation of a non competitive situation.

    Perhaps there are discussions on this in the background but
    TelstraClear is finding the Government too hard nosed for its liking
    so is trying to rally some public opinion on its side.
    peterwn, Sep 19, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In message
    <>, peterwn
    wrote:

    > Perhaps there are discussions on this in the background but
    > TelstraClear is finding the Government too hard nosed for its liking
    > so is trying to rally some public opinion on its side.


    In the US the ISPs have filed lawsuits to stop competition from municipal
    wifi/fibre rollouts.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 20, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. peterwn

    victor Guest

    On 20/09/2010 9:29 a.m., peterwn wrote:
    > Perhaps there are discussions on this in the background but
    > TelstraClear is finding the Government too hard nosed for its liking
    > so is trying to rally some public opinion on its side.



    Don't be fooled.
    TCs cable tv system is nothing like what is being proposed for UFB
    TCs system is a Hybrid Fiber Coax distribution system, its not the same
    as a fiber to the home/curb IP network, definitely not as robust or
    future proof.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_fiber-coaxial

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FTTx

    Even though TC is currently a fast option they charge top dollar and
    give the minimum standard of support they can get away with.
    victor, Sep 20, 2010
    #3
  4. peterwn

    Simon Guest

    On Sep 20, 9:29 am, peterwn <> wrote:

    > Perhaps there are discussions on this in the background but
    > TelstraClear is finding the Government too hard nosed for its liking
    > so is trying to rally some public opinion on its side.


    Community-fibre rollout is a popular alternative in many countries,
    although in some cases local Telco's are fighting them in the courts.

    This article appeared in the NZ Herald recently and is an example of
    what's happening locally: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/small-business/news/article.cfm?c_id=85&objectid=10674273
    Simon, Sep 20, 2010
    #4
  5. peterwn

    victor Guest

    On 20/09/2010 9:29 a.m., peterwn wrote:
    > TelstraClear has kicked off a publicity campaign to persuade the
    > Government to stop or slow down broadband rollout in areas where it
    > has its cable system. At first glance it does seem sensible to
    > concentrate the rollout to areas where people have access to no better
    > than ADSL (copper pair) broadband. Possibly, the coax cable system is
    > doomed in due course.
    >
    > For broadband, coax cable is superior to copper pairs but will remain
    > inferior to fibre optic. The key thing that drives capacity for a coax
    > cable system is the cable length and number of customers served.
    > Capacity and speed can be increased by extending the fibre optic
    > 'overlay' on the cable network, in other words a continuing capital
    > investment in coaxial 'heads' and limited fibre optic extensions. The
    > cost would be far smaller than 'last mile' fibre to each customer. For
    > schools, libraries, etc, where fibre is desirable only limited fibre
    > extensions would be needed to connect either to TelstraClear or
    > Telecom fibre.
    >


    <snipped stuff I agree with>


    VDSL is capable of up to 52Mb/s on copper twisted pair
    DOCSIS is capable of up to 42Mb/s using 256 QAM on coax.
    So docsis doesn't even look that special compared to telecoms
    cabinetized dsl.

    One is a compromise to use phone systems to transport data to the home,
    the other is a compromise to use cable tv systems to transport data to
    the home. The real solution is to use a data network.

    Citylink are the pioneers in rolling out a metro data network in
    Wellington, which is also TCs coverage area, it just wouldn't make sense
    to delay the roll-out in Wellington to indulge TC any more than it would
    delaying it elsewhere to indulge DSL providers.
    victor, Sep 20, 2010
    #5
  6. peterwn

    peterwn Guest

    On Sep 20, 9:34 pm, victor <> wrote:

    > VDSL is capable of up to 52Mb/s on copper twisted pair


    Under optimal circumstances I presume, like having a cabinet outside
    your front gate and pristine copper right up to the modem.

    > DOCSIS is capable of up to 42Mb/s using 256 QAM on coax.
    > So docsis doesn't even look that special compared to telecoms
    > cabinetized dsl.


    This would seem an average rather than optimal amount.

    >
    > One is a compromise to use phone systems to transport data to the home,
    > the other is a compromise to use cable tv systems to transport data to
    > the home. The real solution is to use a data network.


    The issue as I see it - are these data rates satisfactory for say 95%
    of households for say the next 10 years.

    >
    > Citylink are the pioneers in rolling out a metro data network in
    > Wellington, which is also TCs coverage area,


    The two are pretty well mutually exclusive - Citylink in th commercial
    areas and TC in the residential areas.

    > it just wouldn't make sense
    > to delay the roll-out in Wellington to indulge TC any more than it would
    > delaying it elsewhere to indulge DSL providers.


    It makes sense with respect to households that have access to
    satisfactory broadband or access that can fairly readily be made
    satisfactory. IMO the areas that should be getting priority are
    schools, businesses, public libraries, etc as well as areas currently
    with crummy broadband service.

    I agree that copper pairs and coax needto be upgraded in due course,
    but I am at a loss to understand why those who have plenty should get
    more early on, whereas those with poor service have to wait some
    years.

    Interestingly, there is one big advantage of copper right back to a
    reasonably large exchange. They had both batteries (two sets of 25 or
    so hoary big lead acid cells in large glass tanks) and standby
    generators. Hence an ordinary phone kept working even if the power was
    off. Cabinets AFAIK have very limited 'reserve' power capacity.
    peterwn, Sep 20, 2010
    #6
  7. peterwn

    victor Guest

    On 20/09/2010 10:08 p.m., peterwn wrote:
    > On Sep 20, 9:34 pm, victor<> wrote:
    >
    >> VDSL is capable of up to 52Mb/s on copper twisted pair

    >
    > Under optimal circumstances I presume, like having a cabinet outside
    > your front gate and pristine copper right up to the modem.
    >
    >> DOCSIS is capable of up to 42Mb/s using 256 QAM on coax.
    >> So docsis doesn't even look that special compared to telecoms
    >> cabinetized dsl.

    >
    > This would seem an average rather than optimal amount.
    >
    >>
    >> One is a compromise to use phone systems to transport data to the home,
    >> the other is a compromise to use cable tv systems to transport data to
    >> the home. The real solution is to use a data network.

    >
    > The issue as I see it - are these data rates satisfactory for say 95%
    > of households for say the next 10 years.
    >
    >>
    >> Citylink are the pioneers in rolling out a metro data network in
    >> Wellington, which is also TCs coverage area,

    >
    > The two are pretty well mutually exclusive - Citylink in th commercial
    > areas and TC in the residential areas.
    >
    >> it just wouldn't make sense
    >> to delay the roll-out in Wellington to indulge TC any more than it would
    >> delaying it elsewhere to indulge DSL providers.

    >
    > It makes sense with respect to households that have access to
    > satisfactory broadband or access that can fairly readily be made
    > satisfactory. IMO the areas that should be getting priority are
    > schools, businesses, public libraries, etc as well as areas currently
    > with crummy broadband service.
    >


    TC cable is part of the same marketplace as xDSL. It irrelevant in the
    context of the RBI and UFB projects.
    Their speed increase demo is a cynical PR stunt by bonding extra
    channels on DOCSIS 3 and using twice the bandwidth on the coax at an
    unaffordable rate. If you watched HD television on their data rate it
    would cost a fucking fortune. They can only do that because of the low
    uptake of their service. They only connect to about 70,000 houses and
    only about 65% of them use the cable broadband service. And UFB is a
    threat to that business.
    Citylink has a head start in Wellington so will probably complete their
    roll-out first, regardless of the TC coverage.
    TelstraClear want to convince you that what they are offering is
    adequate, and it looks like they have succeeded so far.
    But schools businesses public libraries etc aren't currently using TC
    cable. Where possible in the Wellington region they are using Citylink
    We need ubiquitous networking where using videoconferencing or on demand
    HD content is a normal everday commodity.
    TC are trying to maintain their market as a scarce expensive luxury for
    as long as possible.
    victor, Sep 20, 2010
    #7
  8. On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:24:09 +1200, victor <> wrote:

    >On 20/09/2010 10:08 p.m., peterwn wrote:
    >> On Sep 20, 9:34 pm, victor<> wrote:
    >>
    >>> VDSL is capable of up to 52Mb/s on copper twisted pair

    >>
    >> Under optimal circumstances I presume, like having a cabinet outside
    >> your front gate and pristine copper right up to the modem.
    >>
    >>> DOCSIS is capable of up to 42Mb/s using 256 QAM on coax.
    >>> So docsis doesn't even look that special compared to telecoms
    >>> cabinetized dsl.

    >>
    >> This would seem an average rather than optimal amount.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> One is a compromise to use phone systems to transport data to the home,
    >>> the other is a compromise to use cable tv systems to transport data to
    >>> the home. The real solution is to use a data network.

    >>
    >> The issue as I see it - are these data rates satisfactory for say 95%
    >> of households for say the next 10 years.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Citylink are the pioneers in rolling out a metro data network in
    >>> Wellington, which is also TCs coverage area,

    >>
    >> The two are pretty well mutually exclusive - Citylink in th commercial
    >> areas and TC in the residential areas.
    >>
    >>> it just wouldn't make sense
    >>> to delay the roll-out in Wellington to indulge TC any more than it would
    >>> delaying it elsewhere to indulge DSL providers.

    >>
    >> It makes sense with respect to households that have access to
    >> satisfactory broadband or access that can fairly readily be made
    >> satisfactory. IMO the areas that should be getting priority are
    >> schools, businesses, public libraries, etc as well as areas currently
    >> with crummy broadband service.
    >>

    >
    >TC cable is part of the same marketplace as xDSL. It irrelevant in the
    >context of the RBI and UFB projects.
    >Their speed increase demo is a cynical PR stunt by bonding extra
    >channels on DOCSIS 3 and using twice the bandwidth on the coax at an
    >unaffordable rate. If you watched HD television on their data rate it
    >would cost a fucking fortune. They can only do that because of the low
    >uptake of their service. They only connect to about 70,000 houses and
    >only about 65% of them use the cable broadband service. And UFB is a
    >threat to that business.
    >Citylink has a head start in Wellington so will probably complete their
    >roll-out first, regardless of the TC coverage.
    >TelstraClear want to convince you that what they are offering is
    >adequate, and it looks like they have succeeded so far.
    >But schools businesses public libraries etc aren't currently using TC
    >cable. Where possible in the Wellington region they are using Citylink
    >We need ubiquitous networking where using videoconferencing or on demand
    >HD content is a normal everday commodity.
    >TC are trying to maintain their market as a scarce expensive luxury for
    >as long as possible.




    Funny that they have just dropped there prices and doubled my Cap..
    William Brown, Sep 21, 2010
    #8
  9. peterwn

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    >
    > On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:24:09 +1200, victor <> wrote:
    >
    > >On 20/09/2010 10:08 p.m., peterwn wrote:
    > >> On Sep 20, 9:34 pm, victor<> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> VDSL is capable of up to 52Mb/s on copper twisted pair
    > >>
    > >> Under optimal circumstances I presume, like having a cabinet outside
    > >> your front gate and pristine copper right up to the modem.
    > >>
    > >>> DOCSIS is capable of up to 42Mb/s using 256 QAM on coax.
    > >>> So docsis doesn't even look that special compared to telecoms
    > >>> cabinetized dsl.
    > >>
    > >> This would seem an average rather than optimal amount.
    > >>
    > >>>
    > >>> One is a compromise to use phone systems to transport data to the home,
    > >>> the other is a compromise to use cable tv systems to transport data to
    > >>> the home. The real solution is to use a data network.
    > >>
    > >> The issue as I see it - are these data rates satisfactory for say 95%
    > >> of households for say the next 10 years.
    > >>
    > >>>
    > >>> Citylink are the pioneers in rolling out a metro data network in
    > >>> Wellington, which is also TCs coverage area,
    > >>
    > >> The two are pretty well mutually exclusive - Citylink in th commercial
    > >> areas and TC in the residential areas.
    > >>
    > >>> it just wouldn't make sense
    > >>> to delay the roll-out in Wellington to indulge TC any more than it would
    > >>> delaying it elsewhere to indulge DSL providers.
    > >>
    > >> It makes sense with respect to households that have access to
    > >> satisfactory broadband or access that can fairly readily be made
    > >> satisfactory. IMO the areas that should be getting priority are
    > >> schools, businesses, public libraries, etc as well as areas currently
    > >> with crummy broadband service.
    > >>

    > >
    > >TC cable is part of the same marketplace as xDSL. It irrelevant in the
    > >context of the RBI and UFB projects.
    > >Their speed increase demo is a cynical PR stunt by bonding extra
    > >channels on DOCSIS 3 and using twice the bandwidth on the coax at an
    > >unaffordable rate. If you watched HD television on their data rate it
    > >would cost a fucking fortune. They can only do that because of the low
    > >uptake of their service. They only connect to about 70,000 houses and
    > >only about 65% of them use the cable broadband service. And UFB is a
    > >threat to that business.
    > >Citylink has a head start in Wellington so will probably complete their
    > >roll-out first, regardless of the TC coverage.
    > >TelstraClear want to convince you that what they are offering is
    > >adequate, and it looks like they have succeeded so far.
    > >But schools businesses public libraries etc aren't currently using TC
    > >cable. Where possible in the Wellington region they are using Citylink
    > >We need ubiquitous networking where using videoconferencing or on demand
    > >HD content is a normal everday commodity.
    > >TC are trying to maintain their market as a scarce expensive luxury for
    > >as long as possible.

    >
    >
    >
    > Funny that they have just dropped there prices and doubled my Cap..


    Are you even ON cable Woger?

    Here are the new plans, effective Oct (*way* overdue IMO)...

    http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/residential/inhome/internet/cable-
    broadband/plans.cfm

    http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/residential/inhome/packages/index.cfm

    For me, I get an extra 10Gb (60 instead of 50), a 5Mbps download
    increase (to 15Mbps), and the upload speed remains at a lowly 2Mbps.
    The price is down $10. To counter the price, the GST is up 2.5% from
    the same month on that, my phone line and my mobile charges. In short at
    just under $200 a month, I'll be lucky to save $5.

    Now lets compare that with Telecom's VDSL. No reason you shouldn't get
    around 40Mbps if you're quite close to the exchange. No cap. Bet the
    pricing will be cheaper. I haven't looked at it for a while, but IIRC,
    their test area rollout was in Oct?

    And as for customer service, the last time I rang TS support it took 45
    minutes to get to a human - Telecom took less than one minute earlier on
    the same day. (I can only assume that since the XT debacle, Telecom have
    *really* picked things up - and good on 'em).

    --
    Duncan.
    Dave Doe, Sep 21, 2010
    #9
  10. On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:37:07 +1200, Dave Doe <> wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > says...
    >>
    >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:24:09 +1200, victor <> wrote:
    >>
    >> >On 20/09/2010 10:08 p.m., peterwn wrote:
    >> >> On Sep 20, 9:34 pm, victor<> wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >>> VDSL is capable of up to 52Mb/s on copper twisted pair
    >> >>
    >> >> Under optimal circumstances I presume, like having a cabinet outside
    >> >> your front gate and pristine copper right up to the modem.
    >> >>
    >> >>> DOCSIS is capable of up to 42Mb/s using 256 QAM on coax.
    >> >>> So docsis doesn't even look that special compared to telecoms
    >> >>> cabinetized dsl.
    >> >>
    >> >> This would seem an average rather than optimal amount.
    >> >>
    >> >>>
    >> >>> One is a compromise to use phone systems to transport data to the home,
    >> >>> the other is a compromise to use cable tv systems to transport data to
    >> >>> the home. The real solution is to use a data network.
    >> >>
    >> >> The issue as I see it - are these data rates satisfactory for say 95%
    >> >> of households for say the next 10 years.
    >> >>
    >> >>>
    >> >>> Citylink are the pioneers in rolling out a metro data network in
    >> >>> Wellington, which is also TCs coverage area,
    >> >>
    >> >> The two are pretty well mutually exclusive - Citylink in th commercial
    >> >> areas and TC in the residential areas.
    >> >>
    >> >>> it just wouldn't make sense
    >> >>> to delay the roll-out in Wellington to indulge TC any more than it would
    >> >>> delaying it elsewhere to indulge DSL providers.
    >> >>
    >> >> It makes sense with respect to households that have access to
    >> >> satisfactory broadband or access that can fairly readily be made
    >> >> satisfactory. IMO the areas that should be getting priority are
    >> >> schools, businesses, public libraries, etc as well as areas currently
    >> >> with crummy broadband service.
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> >TC cable is part of the same marketplace as xDSL. It irrelevant in the
    >> >context of the RBI and UFB projects.
    >> >Their speed increase demo is a cynical PR stunt by bonding extra
    >> >channels on DOCSIS 3 and using twice the bandwidth on the coax at an
    >> >unaffordable rate. If you watched HD television on their data rate it
    >> >would cost a fucking fortune. They can only do that because of the low
    >> >uptake of their service. They only connect to about 70,000 houses and
    >> >only about 65% of them use the cable broadband service. And UFB is a
    >> >threat to that business.
    >> >Citylink has a head start in Wellington so will probably complete their
    >> >roll-out first, regardless of the TC coverage.
    >> >TelstraClear want to convince you that what they are offering is
    >> >adequate, and it looks like they have succeeded so far.
    >> >But schools businesses public libraries etc aren't currently using TC
    >> >cable. Where possible in the Wellington region they are using Citylink
    >> >We need ubiquitous networking where using videoconferencing or on demand
    >> >HD content is a normal everday commodity.
    >> >TC are trying to maintain their market as a scarce expensive luxury for
    >> >as long as possible.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Funny that they have just dropped there prices and doubled my Cap..

    >
    >Are you even ON cable Woger?
    >
    >Here are the new plans, effective Oct (*way* overdue IMO)...
    >
    >http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/residential/inhome/internet/cable-
    >broadband/plans.cfm
    >
    >http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/residential/inhome/packages/index.cfm
    >
    >For me, I get an extra 10Gb (60 instead of 50), a 5Mbps download
    >increase (to 15Mbps), and the upload speed remains at a lowly 2Mbps.
    >The price is down $10. To counter the price, the GST is up 2.5% from
    >the same month on that, my phone line and my mobile charges. In short at
    >just under $200 a month, I'll be lucky to save $5.




    May be you just cant read the New prices are with 15% GST its at the
    bottom of the prices letter.


    Mine goes from 20Gb to 40Gb and my price is 109.88 was $115.90 Plus the
    new prices is with the 15% GST.

    >Now lets compare that with Telecom's VDSL. No reason you shouldn't get
    >around 40Mbps if you're quite close to the exchange. No cap. Bet the
    >pricing will be cheaper. I haven't looked at it for a while, but IIRC,
    >their test area rollout was in Oct?




    Telecom does have a CAP as they dropped there go large, a Big Telecom
    user and Ex Worker has moved to Slingshot as the have a no Cap service.


    Plus you need to be with in 1k of the exchange.

    >And as for customer service, the last time I rang TS support it took 45
    >minutes to get to a human - Telecom took less than one minute earlier on
    >the same day. (I can only assume that since the XT debacle, Telecom have
    >*really* picked things up - and good on 'em).




    Please don't forget that TC is upping the speed to some 100Gbps and
    upping the service to support HD and there new set top PVR box..

    May be you just don't read this news group very often but most people
    here Hate Telescum.
    William Brown, Sep 21, 2010
    #10
  11. peterwn

    Enkidu Guest

    On 20/09/10 09:29, peterwn wrote:
    >
    > TelstraClear has kicked off a publicity campaign to persuade the
    > Government to stop or slow down broadband rollout in areas where it
    > has its cable system. At first glance it does seem sensible to
    > concentrate the rollout to areas where people have access to no
    > better than ADSL (copper pair) broadband. Possibly, the coax cable
    > system is doomed in due course.
    >

    It seems that TelstraClear a) is scared of competition, b) has no plans
    to expand its coverage its present coverage.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

    The end excuses any evil - Sophocles
    Enkidu, Sep 21, 2010
    #11
  12. peterwn

    victor Guest

    On 22/09/2010 12:12 p.m., peterwn wrote:
    > On Sep 22, 11:05 am, victor<> wrote:
    >> On 22/09/2010 9:39 a.m., peterwn wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sep 21, 10:16 pm, Enkidu<> wrote:
    >>>> On 20/09/10 09:29, peterwn wrote:

    >>
    >>>>> TelstraClear has kicked off a publicity campaign to persuade the
    >>>>> Government to stop or slow down broadband rollout in areas where it
    >>>>> has its cable system. At first glance it does seem sensible to
    >>>>> concentrate the rollout to areas where people have access to no
    >>>>> better than ADSL (copper pair) broadband. Possibly, the coax cable
    >>>>> system is doomed in due course.

    >>
    >>>> It seems that TelstraClear a) is scared of competition, b) has no plans
    >>>> to expand its coverage its present coverage.

    >>
    >>> Any company needs to be able to meet the competition. In the case of
    >>> TC's cable system, the system would now seem to be in its twilight
    >>> years. In its heyday it offered multi channel TV delivery and
    >>> broadband superior to what Telecom could deliver. Sky satellite TV and
    >>> Telecom cabinetisation now compete head to head with cable such that
    >>> it is not worth TC extending the cable network, although it would
    >>> probably undertake limited capacity gain projects. TC will probably
    >>> dismantle its coax cable and associated copper pair network in the
    >>> next 10 years or so if fibre to home is installed in TC's cable areas.

    >>
    >>> The issue for TC is to optimise its revenue from the cable network
    >>> from now until its demise (which is when residual revenue is less than
    >>> operating costs, pole rental etc). To do this, it needs to try and
    >>> head off UFB rollout in its cable area. To succeed with this, it will
    >>> need to convince the government that it can (say) meet 95% of its
    >>> prospective customers' broadband needs, sharpen up its priving and
    >>> offer 'bare' cable modem service.

    >>
    >>> As can be seen from comments here, TC's traditional crappy call centre
    >>> service and previous high pricing is not exactly going to work in its
    >>> favour.

    >>
    >> Its not any more convincing a case than that for DSL being a replacement
    >> for UFB.
    >> The high speed enhancement to the cable modem service is a high priced
    >> restricted availability premium product where the same speed would be
    >> the entry level of UFB connections.

    >
    > As I said, TC would need to significantly sharpen up its pricing if it
    > were to persuade Stephen Joyce to allow TC cable to serve as an
    > interim solution. Even with fibre to every home that wants it, the
    > significant 'last mile' costs have to be met by someone. The options
    > are a relatively high 'fixed' monthly charge to give a return on the
    > 'last mile' investment, or spread the 'last mile' cost between a lower
    > fixed charge and variable data charges.
    >
    > Another related charging problem may be where neighbours share a fibre
    > connection and run cat 5 cables through their back yards.


    There is no need for an interim solution, and neither cable nor adsl is
    an interim solution, its do or do not. Its not a matter for debate, the
    government has made its commitment and the electorate expects them to
    honor it. TC are too late, their advertising is to draw subscribers,
    they won't alter or re-litigate the case for UFB

    The specification is already written and agreed in the draft standard
    published on the TCF site for the last mile using passive optical
    network (PON) splitters for the FTTP service, the providers have been
    shortlisted and the technology has been decided. The last mile costs
    will drop below coax and copper pairs just by economies of scale.

    Ironically TC could sell access for the UFB fiber to be blown/pulled
    through their ducting, (so could Telecom).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_optical_network
    victor, Sep 21, 2010
    #12
  13. peterwn

    victor Guest

    On 21/09/2010 9:23 p.m., William Brown wrote:
    > On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:37:07 +1200, Dave Doe<> wrote:
    >
    >> In article<>,
    >> says...
    >>>
    >>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:24:09 +1200, victor<> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 20/09/2010 10:08 p.m., peterwn wrote:
    >>>>> On Sep 20, 9:34 pm, victor<> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> VDSL is capable of up to 52Mb/s on copper twisted pair
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Under optimal circumstances I presume, like having a cabinet outside
    >>>>> your front gate and pristine copper right up to the modem.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> DOCSIS is capable of up to 42Mb/s using 256 QAM on coax.
    >>>>>> So docsis doesn't even look that special compared to telecoms
    >>>>>> cabinetized dsl.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> This would seem an average rather than optimal amount.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> One is a compromise to use phone systems to transport data to the home,
    >>>>>> the other is a compromise to use cable tv systems to transport data to
    >>>>>> the home. The real solution is to use a data network.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The issue as I see it - are these data rates satisfactory for say 95%
    >>>>> of households for say the next 10 years.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Citylink are the pioneers in rolling out a metro data network in
    >>>>>> Wellington, which is also TCs coverage area,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The two are pretty well mutually exclusive - Citylink in th commercial
    >>>>> areas and TC in the residential areas.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> it just wouldn't make sense
    >>>>>> to delay the roll-out in Wellington to indulge TC any more than it would
    >>>>>> delaying it elsewhere to indulge DSL providers.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It makes sense with respect to households that have access to
    >>>>> satisfactory broadband or access that can fairly readily be made
    >>>>> satisfactory. IMO the areas that should be getting priority are
    >>>>> schools, businesses, public libraries, etc as well as areas currently
    >>>>> with crummy broadband service.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> TC cable is part of the same marketplace as xDSL. It irrelevant in the
    >>>> context of the RBI and UFB projects.
    >>>> Their speed increase demo is a cynical PR stunt by bonding extra
    >>>> channels on DOCSIS 3 and using twice the bandwidth on the coax at an
    >>>> unaffordable rate. If you watched HD television on their data rate it
    >>>> would cost a fucking fortune. They can only do that because of the low
    >>>> uptake of their service. They only connect to about 70,000 houses and
    >>>> only about 65% of them use the cable broadband service. And UFB is a
    >>>> threat to that business.
    >>>> Citylink has a head start in Wellington so will probably complete their
    >>>> roll-out first, regardless of the TC coverage.
    >>>> TelstraClear want to convince you that what they are offering is
    >>>> adequate, and it looks like they have succeeded so far.
    >>>> But schools businesses public libraries etc aren't currently using TC
    >>>> cable. Where possible in the Wellington region they are using Citylink
    >>>> We need ubiquitous networking where using videoconferencing or on demand
    >>>> HD content is a normal everday commodity.
    >>>> TC are trying to maintain their market as a scarce expensive luxury for
    >>>> as long as possible.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Funny that they have just dropped there prices and doubled my Cap..

    >>
    >> Are you even ON cable Woger?
    >>
    >> Here are the new plans, effective Oct (*way* overdue IMO)...
    >>
    >> http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/residential/inhome/internet/cable-
    >> broadband/plans.cfm
    >>
    >> http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/residential/inhome/packages/index.cfm
    >>
    >> For me, I get an extra 10Gb (60 instead of 50), a 5Mbps download
    >> increase (to 15Mbps), and the upload speed remains at a lowly 2Mbps.
    >> The price is down $10. To counter the price, the GST is up 2.5% from
    >> the same month on that, my phone line and my mobile charges. In short at
    >> just under $200 a month, I'll be lucky to save $5.

    >
    >
    >
    > May be you just cant read the New prices are with 15% GST its at the
    > bottom of the prices letter.
    >
    >
    > Mine goes from 20Gb to 40Gb and my price is 109.88 was $115.90 Plus the
    > new prices is with the 15% GST.
    >
    >> Now lets compare that with Telecom's VDSL. No reason you shouldn't get
    >> around 40Mbps if you're quite close to the exchange. No cap. Bet the
    >> pricing will be cheaper. I haven't looked at it for a while, but IIRC,
    >> their test area rollout was in Oct?

    >
    >
    >
    > Telecom does have a CAP as they dropped there go large, a Big Telecom
    > user and Ex Worker has moved to Slingshot as the have a no Cap service.
    >
    >
    > Plus you need to be with in 1k of the exchange.
    >
    >> And as for customer service, the last time I rang TS support it took 45
    >> minutes to get to a human - Telecom took less than one minute earlier on
    >> the same day. (I can only assume that since the XT debacle, Telecom have
    >> *really* picked things up - and good on 'em).

    >
    >
    >
    > Please don't forget that TC is upping the speed to some 100Gbps and
    > upping the service to support HD and there new set top PVR box..
    >
    > May be you just don't read this news group very often but most people
    > here Hate Telescum.


    I'm a longtime triple play TC customer, but if I was looking for a new
    deal I would do the maths to decide, their corporate culture is
    interchangeable with Telecom or Vodafone etc
    TC will only up the speed for the premium price, its an option which
    comes with the new version of DOCSIS.

    PVRs ?
    Whats the point ?
    With a proper network and servers, video is just another file type.
    That is what TC are streaming to your PVR. Its total bullshit, they
    might as well just let you access it off their servers on demand like HD
    Youtube.
    PVRs are halfway house technology
    victor, Sep 21, 2010
    #13
  14. peterwn

    peterwn Guest

    On Sep 21, 10:16 pm, Enkidu <> wrote:
    > On 20/09/10 09:29, peterwn wrote:
    >
    > > TelstraClear has kicked off a publicity campaign to persuade the
    > > Government to stop or slow down broadband rollout in areas where it
    > > has its cable system. At first glance it does seem sensible to
    > > concentrate the rollout to areas where people have access to no
    > > better than ADSL (copper pair) broadband. Possibly, the coax cable
    > > system is doomed in due course.

    >
    > It seems that TelstraClear a) is scared of competition, b) has no plans
    > to expand its coverage its present coverage.
    >


    Any company needs to be able to meet the competition. In the case of
    TC's cable system, the system would now seem to be in its twilight
    years. In its heyday it offered multi channel TV delivery and
    broadband superior to what Telecom could deliver. Sky satellite TV and
    Telecom cabinetisation now compete head to head with cable such that
    it is not worth TC extending the cable network, although it would
    probably undertake limited capacity gain projects. TC will probably
    dismantle its coax cable and associated copper pair network in the
    next 10 years or so if fibre to home is installed in TC's cable areas.

    The issue for TC is to optimise its revenue from the cable network
    from now until its demise (which is when residual revenue is less than
    operating costs, pole rental etc). To do this, it needs to try and
    head off UFB rollout in its cable area. To succeed with this, it will
    need to convince the government that it can (say) meet 95% of its
    prospective customers' broadband needs, sharpen up its priving and
    offer 'bare' cable modem service.

    As can be seen from comments here, TC's traditional crappy call centre
    service and previous high pricing is not exactly going to work in its
    favour.
    peterwn, Sep 21, 2010
    #14
  15. peterwn

    victor Guest

    On 22/09/2010 9:39 a.m., peterwn wrote:
    > On Sep 21, 10:16 pm, Enkidu<> wrote:
    >> On 20/09/10 09:29, peterwn wrote:
    >>
    >>> TelstraClear has kicked off a publicity campaign to persuade the
    >>> Government to stop or slow down broadband rollout in areas where it
    >>> has its cable system. At first glance it does seem sensible to
    >>> concentrate the rollout to areas where people have access to no
    >>> better than ADSL (copper pair) broadband. Possibly, the coax cable
    >>> system is doomed in due course.

    >>
    >> It seems that TelstraClear a) is scared of competition, b) has no plans
    >> to expand its coverage its present coverage.
    >>

    >
    > Any company needs to be able to meet the competition. In the case of
    > TC's cable system, the system would now seem to be in its twilight
    > years. In its heyday it offered multi channel TV delivery and
    > broadband superior to what Telecom could deliver. Sky satellite TV and
    > Telecom cabinetisation now compete head to head with cable such that
    > it is not worth TC extending the cable network, although it would
    > probably undertake limited capacity gain projects. TC will probably
    > dismantle its coax cable and associated copper pair network in the
    > next 10 years or so if fibre to home is installed in TC's cable areas.
    >
    > The issue for TC is to optimise its revenue from the cable network
    > from now until its demise (which is when residual revenue is less than
    > operating costs, pole rental etc). To do this, it needs to try and
    > head off UFB rollout in its cable area. To succeed with this, it will
    > need to convince the government that it can (say) meet 95% of its
    > prospective customers' broadband needs, sharpen up its priving and
    > offer 'bare' cable modem service.
    >
    > As can be seen from comments here, TC's traditional crappy call centre
    > service and previous high pricing is not exactly going to work in its
    > favour.
    >
    >

    Its not any more convincing a case than that for DSL being a replacement
    for UFB.
    The high speed enhancement to the cable modem service is a high priced
    restricted availability premium product where the same speed would be
    the entry level of UFB connections.
    victor, Sep 22, 2010
    #15
  16. peterwn

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    >
    > On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:37:07 +1200, Dave Doe <> wrote:
    >
    > >In article <>,
    > > says...
    > >>
    > >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:24:09 +1200, victor <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >On 20/09/2010 10:08 p.m., peterwn wrote:
    > >> >> On Sep 20, 9:34 pm, victor<> wrote:
    > >> >>
    > >> >>> VDSL is capable of up to 52Mb/s on copper twisted pair
    > >> >>
    > >> >> Under optimal circumstances I presume, like having a cabinet outside
    > >> >> your front gate and pristine copper right up to the modem.
    > >> >>
    > >> >>> DOCSIS is capable of up to 42Mb/s using 256 QAM on coax.
    > >> >>> So docsis doesn't even look that special compared to telecoms
    > >> >>> cabinetized dsl.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> This would seem an average rather than optimal amount.
    > >> >>
    > >> >>>
    > >> >>> One is a compromise to use phone systems to transport data to the home,
    > >> >>> the other is a compromise to use cable tv systems to transport data to
    > >> >>> the home. The real solution is to use a data network.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> The issue as I see it - are these data rates satisfactory for say 95%
    > >> >> of households for say the next 10 years.
    > >> >>
    > >> >>>
    > >> >>> Citylink are the pioneers in rolling out a metro data network in
    > >> >>> Wellington, which is also TCs coverage area,
    > >> >>
    > >> >> The two are pretty well mutually exclusive - Citylink in th commercial
    > >> >> areas and TC in the residential areas.
    > >> >>
    > >> >>> it just wouldn't make sense
    > >> >>> to delay the roll-out in Wellington to indulge TC any more than it would
    > >> >>> delaying it elsewhere to indulge DSL providers.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> It makes sense with respect to households that have access to
    > >> >> satisfactory broadband or access that can fairly readily be made
    > >> >> satisfactory. IMO the areas that should be getting priority are
    > >> >> schools, businesses, public libraries, etc as well as areas currently
    > >> >> with crummy broadband service.
    > >> >>
    > >> >
    > >> >TC cable is part of the same marketplace as xDSL. It irrelevant in the
    > >> >context of the RBI and UFB projects.
    > >> >Their speed increase demo is a cynical PR stunt by bonding extra
    > >> >channels on DOCSIS 3 and using twice the bandwidth on the coax at an
    > >> >unaffordable rate. If you watched HD television on their data rate it
    > >> >would cost a fucking fortune. They can only do that because of the low
    > >> >uptake of their service. They only connect to about 70,000 houses and
    > >> >only about 65% of them use the cable broadband service. And UFB is a
    > >> >threat to that business.
    > >> >Citylink has a head start in Wellington so will probably complete their
    > >> >roll-out first, regardless of the TC coverage.
    > >> >TelstraClear want to convince you that what they are offering is
    > >> >adequate, and it looks like they have succeeded so far.
    > >> >But schools businesses public libraries etc aren't currently using TC
    > >> >cable. Where possible in the Wellington region they are using Citylink
    > >> >We need ubiquitous networking where using videoconferencing or on demand
    > >> >HD content is a normal everday commodity.
    > >> >TC are trying to maintain their market as a scarce expensive luxury for
    > >> >as long as possible.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Funny that they have just dropped there prices and doubled my Cap..

    > >
    > >Are you even ON cable Woger?
    > >
    > >Here are the new plans, effective Oct (*way* overdue IMO)...
    > >
    > >http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/residential/inhome/internet/cable-
    > >broadband/plans.cfm
    > >
    > >http://www.telstraclear.co.nz/residential/inhome/packages/index.cfm
    > >
    > >For me, I get an extra 10Gb (60 instead of 50), a 5Mbps download
    > >increase (to 15Mbps), and the upload speed remains at a lowly 2Mbps.
    > >The price is down $10. To counter the price, the GST is up 2.5% from
    > >the same month on that, my phone line and my mobile charges. In short at
    > >just under $200 a month, I'll be lucky to save $5.

    >
    >
    >
    > May be you just cant read the New prices are with 15% GST its at the
    > bottom of the prices letter.


    Yeah I know that - that's even worse! (PS: so do the old prices!). End
    of the day, my package is about the same price (might be $5 cheaper if
    I'm lucky), and I've got bugger all extra from the 'upgrade'.


    > May be you just don't read this news group very often but most people
    > here Hate Telescum.


    I was one of them, and I'm not convinced yet either. But they really
    have picked things up.

    But test it! - phone TS right now to "talk to a technician". Then try
    Telecom. I sure would be interested in hearing the results.

    --
    Duncan.
    Dave Doe, Sep 22, 2010
    #16
  17. peterwn

    peterwn Guest

    On Sep 22, 11:05 am, victor <> wrote:
    > On 22/09/2010 9:39 a.m., peterwn wrote:
    >
    > > On Sep 21, 10:16 pm, Enkidu<>  wrote:
    > >> On 20/09/10 09:29, peterwn wrote:

    >
    > >>> TelstraClear has kicked off a publicity campaign to persuade the
    > >>> Government to stop or slow down broadband rollout in areas where it
    > >>> has its cable system. At first glance it does seem sensible to
    > >>> concentrate the rollout to areas where people have access to no
    > >>> better than ADSL (copper pair) broadband. Possibly, the coax cable
    > >>> system is doomed in due course.

    >
    > >> It seems that TelstraClear a) is scared of competition, b) has no plans
    > >> to expand its coverage its present coverage.

    >
    > > Any company needs to be able to meet the competition. In the case of
    > > TC's cable system, the system would now seem to be in its twilight
    > > years. In its heyday it offered multi channel TV delivery and
    > > broadband superior to what Telecom could deliver. Sky satellite TV and
    > > Telecom cabinetisation now compete head to head with cable such that
    > > it is not worth TC extending the cable network, although it would
    > > probably undertake limited capacity gain projects. TC will probably
    > > dismantle its coax cable and associated copper pair network in the
    > > next 10 years or so if fibre to home is installed in TC's cable areas.

    >
    > > The issue for TC is to optimise its revenue from the cable network
    > > from now until its demise (which is when residual revenue is less than
    > > operating costs, pole rental etc). To do this, it needs to try and
    > > head off UFB rollout in its cable area. To succeed with this, it will
    > > need to convince the government that it can (say) meet 95% of its
    > > prospective customers' broadband needs, sharpen up its priving and
    > > offer 'bare' cable modem service.

    >
    > > As can be seen from comments here, TC's traditional crappy call centre
    > > service and previous high pricing is not exactly going to work in its
    > > favour.

    >
    > Its not any more convincing a case than that for DSL being a replacement
    > for UFB.
    > The high speed enhancement to the cable modem service is a high priced
    > restricted availability premium product where the same speed would be
    > the entry level of UFB connections.


    As I said, TC would need to significantly sharpen up its pricing if it
    were to persuade Stephen Joyce to allow TC cable to serve as an
    interim solution. Even with fibre to every home that wants it, the
    significant 'last mile' costs have to be met by someone. The options
    are a relatively high 'fixed' monthly charge to give a return on the
    'last mile' investment, or spread the 'last mile' cost between a lower
    fixed charge and variable data charges.

    Another related charging problem may be where neighbours share a fibre
    connection and run cat 5 cables through their back yards.
    peterwn, Sep 22, 2010
    #17
  18. peterwn

    victor Guest

    On 22/09/2010 12:12 p.m., peterwn wrote:
    > On Sep 22, 11:05 am, victor<> wrote:
    >> On 22/09/2010 9:39 a.m., peterwn wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sep 21, 10:16 pm, Enkidu<> wrote:
    >>>> On 20/09/10 09:29, peterwn wrote:

    >>
    >>>>> TelstraClear has kicked off a publicity campaign to persuade the
    >>>>> Government to stop or slow down broadband rollout in areas where it
    >>>>> has its cable system. At first glance it does seem sensible to
    >>>>> concentrate the rollout to areas where people have access to no
    >>>>> better than ADSL (copper pair) broadband. Possibly, the coax cable
    >>>>> system is doomed in due course.

    >>
    >>>> It seems that TelstraClear a) is scared of competition, b) has no plans
    >>>> to expand its coverage its present coverage.

    >>
    >>> Any company needs to be able to meet the competition. In the case of
    >>> TC's cable system, the system would now seem to be in its twilight
    >>> years. In its heyday it offered multi channel TV delivery and
    >>> broadband superior to what Telecom could deliver. Sky satellite TV and
    >>> Telecom cabinetisation now compete head to head with cable such that
    >>> it is not worth TC extending the cable network, although it would
    >>> probably undertake limited capacity gain projects. TC will probably
    >>> dismantle its coax cable and associated copper pair network in the
    >>> next 10 years or so if fibre to home is installed in TC's cable areas.

    >>
    >>> The issue for TC is to optimise its revenue from the cable network
    >>> from now until its demise (which is when residual revenue is less than
    >>> operating costs, pole rental etc). To do this, it needs to try and
    >>> head off UFB rollout in its cable area. To succeed with this, it will
    >>> need to convince the government that it can (say) meet 95% of its
    >>> prospective customers' broadband needs, sharpen up its priving and
    >>> offer 'bare' cable modem service.

    >>
    >>> As can be seen from comments here, TC's traditional crappy call centre
    >>> service and previous high pricing is not exactly going to work in its
    >>> favour.

    >>
    >> Its not any more convincing a case than that for DSL being a replacement
    >> for UFB.
    >> The high speed enhancement to the cable modem service is a high priced
    >> restricted availability premium product where the same speed would be
    >> the entry level of UFB connections.

    >
    > As I said, TC would need to significantly sharpen up its pricing if it
    > were to persuade Stephen Joyce to allow TC cable to serve as an
    > interim solution. Even with fibre to every home that wants it, the
    > significant 'last mile' costs have to be met by someone. The options
    > are a relatively high 'fixed' monthly charge to give a return on the
    > 'last mile' investment, or spread the 'last mile' cost between a lower
    > fixed charge and variable data charges.
    >
    > Another related charging problem may be where neighbours share a fibre
    > connection and run cat 5 cables through their back yards.


    There is no need for an interim solution, and neither cable nor adsl is
    an interim solution, its do or do not. Its not a matter for debate, the
    government has made its commitment and the electorate expects them to
    honor it. TC are too late, their advertising is to draw subscribers,
    they won't alter or re-litigate the case for UFB

    The specification is already written and agreed in the draft standard
    published on the TCF site for the last mile using passive optical
    network (PON) splitters for the FTTP service, the providers have been
    shortlisted and the technology has been decided. The last mile costs
    will drop below coax and copper pairs just by economies of scale.

    Ironically TC could sell access for the UFB fiber to be blown/pulled
    through their ducting, (so could Telecom).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_optical_network
    victor, Sep 22, 2010
    #18
  19. peterwn

    peterwn Guest

    On Sep 22, 1:13 am, victor <> wrote:

    >
    > There is no need for an interim solution, and neither cable nor adsl is
    > an interim solution, its do or do not. Its not a matter for debate, the
    > government has made its commitment and the electorate expects them to
    > honor it. TC are too late, their advertising is to draw subscribers,
    > they won't alter or re-litigate the case for UFB
    >
    > The specification is already written and agreed in the draft standard
    > published on the TCF site for the last mile using passive optical
    > network (PON) splitters for the FTTP service, the providers have been
    > shortlisted and the technology has been decided. The last mile costs
    > will drop below coax and copper pairs just by economies of scale.
    >


    I am not saying UFB should never happen in TC cable areas, all I am
    saying is that if TC plays ball on pricing, then TC cable areas should
    receive lower priority than areas with inferior broadband access
    compared with TC cable.

    If I was in an area with poor or nil broadband, I would be justifiably
    annoyed if the Government did not attempt to speed up progress in such
    areas by putting TC cable areas at the end of the UFB if a reasonable
    arrangement with TC could be negotiated - which it could the UFB
    'stick' is mighty big..

    This still sits quite comfortably with the statements in your above
    two paragraphs.
    peterwn, Sep 22, 2010
    #19
  20. peterwn

    victor Guest

    On 22/09/2010 2:35 p.m., peterwn wrote:
    > On Sep 22, 1:13 am, victor<> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> There is no need for an interim solution, and neither cable nor adsl is
    >> an interim solution, its do or do not. Its not a matter for debate, the
    >> government has made its commitment and the electorate expects them to
    >> honor it. TC are too late, their advertising is to draw subscribers,
    >> they won't alter or re-litigate the case for UFB
    >>
    >> The specification is already written and agreed in the draft standard
    >> published on the TCF site for the last mile using passive optical
    >> network (PON) splitters for the FTTP service, the providers have been
    >> shortlisted and the technology has been decided. The last mile costs
    >> will drop below coax and copper pairs just by economies of scale.
    >>

    >
    > I am not saying UFB should never happen in TC cable areas, all I am
    > saying is that if TC plays ball on pricing, then TC cable areas should
    > receive lower priority than areas with inferior broadband access
    > compared with TC cable.
    >
    > If I was in an area with poor or nil broadband, I would be justifiably
    > annoyed if the Government did not attempt to speed up progress in such
    > areas by putting TC cable areas at the end of the UFB if a reasonable
    > arrangement with TC could be negotiated - which it could the UFB
    > 'stick' is mighty big..
    >
    > This still sits quite comfortably with the statements in your above
    > two paragraphs.


    TCs network has no relevance at all to any priorities for the UFB
    project, its primary purpose is cable television.
    The reason that TC have built in the locations they have is because of
    demand.
    That is not a good reason to delay UFB in those areas, TC should be
    encouraged to migrate and decommission their unsightly aerial coax
    bundles and suspended amplifiers.
    No one in government or the telecommunications has suggested such a
    thing apart from Alan Freeth the TC CEO.
    I don't know why you are persisting with this idea that there is
    anything to be gained in assigning priority to the rollout of UFB. There
    isn't a resource problem.
    The areas with schools libraries businesses etc with poor broadband
    coverage are already covered by the Rural Broadband Initiative, a
    previous government program.
    To assign any priorities puts the designated UFB partners in the TC
    coverage areas at an commercial disadvantage for no reason, arbitrarily
    assigning a period of revenue to TC
    victor, Sep 22, 2010
    #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. SchoolTech

    Telstraclear Business Broadband Terms

    SchoolTech, Nov 18, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    435
    thingy
    Nov 18, 2005
  2. Petrushka

    Broadband on TelstraClear phone line

    Petrushka, Jan 27, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    1,033
    Don Hills
    Feb 2, 2006
  3. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    7,601
    Lloyd
    Apr 15, 2006
  4. Finch

    TelstraClear Broadband Issues?

    Finch, Aug 22, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    1,045
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Aug 25, 2006
  5. Craig Shore

    Re: TelstraClear's broadband usage meter

    Craig Shore, May 20, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,039
    Craig Shore
    May 20, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page