Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 37807	2003-09-18 11:40:00	As exprcted,Watchdog recommends broadband competition for Telecom	metla (154)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
176261	2003-09-20 11:10:00	Humm, "excellent well priced product" When I can get this product I'll let you know if it's excellent. Untill then I am more than happy for someone (anyone) else to provide me with ADSL. Telecom REALLY need to do something about their broardband coverage.	cold_fu5ion (3438)
176262	2003-09-20 12:16:00	> One thing that annoys me about this, is how Telecoms > competitors feel they have the right to use the > network that Telecom designed set up. That network > cost Telecom tens of millions. The underlying issue here is that the Network was paid for by you and me, either as subscribers or as taxpayers. The problem is the Government then sold that part of the network off. That was the error. The network should be a separate asset, maintained and managed, run as a responsible company in its own right. It should exist for any other company to be able to pay normal commercial rates to use it to offer services to consumers. This is how the electricity industry operates, it is not lawful for a company that owns the cables to also be involved in selling electricity that flows in the cables. In the Telecom case, they both own the cables and sell the product that flows through them. That is a position that enables dominance, and with the unbundling that dominance is theoretically weakened. If we look to the electricity sector as an example, we should not expect prices of ADSL to tumble fast unfortunately.	godfather (25)
176263	2003-09-20 21:47:00	We did indeed pay for the network,as I have said b4 the goverment then sold it,creating a monopoly. So who are we to blame, the gov. for selling it or the company for buying it. The government sold it ,so I believe the buck stops there.	Thomas (1820)
176264	2003-09-20 22:01:00	Don't forget the fact that the network Telecom set up was provided to them at reduced price by the USA. Why? Because they wanted to test new telecommunications equipment in a small area (NZ) before installing it in their own country. So Telecom got provided all this then state-of-the-art equipment. Of course, that equipment isn't the best now. However, the main point here, is that it would cost any telco billions to setup a new network here, because of how long everything has been in place. Major infrastructure work would be happening all over the country, and it's not something any telco (except maybe Telecom, if they upgraded their current network) can afford to do and expect to get major revenue in return. Hence why it would be easier by far to have the network owned by a third-party, and all telcos pay this party for access to the network.	agent (30)
176265	2003-09-20 23:21:00	> > One thing that annoys me about this, is how > Telecoms > > competitors feel they have the right to use the > > network that Telecom designed set up. That network > > cost Telecom tens of millions. > > The underlying issue here is that the Network was > paid for by you and me, either as subscribers or as > taxpayers. The problem is the Government then sold > that part of the network off. That was the error. > > The network should be a separate asset, maintained > and managed, run as a responsible company in its own > right. It should exist for any other company to be > able to pay normal commercial rates to use it to > offer services to consumers. > > This is how the electricity industry operates, it is > not lawful for a company that owns the cables to also > be involved in selling electricity that flows in the > cables. > > In the Telecom case, they both own the cables and > sell the product that flows through them. That is a > position that enables dominance, and with the > unbundling that dominance is theoretically weakened. > > If we look to the electricity sector as an example, > we should not expect prices of ADSL to tumble fast > unfortunately. Glad you mentioned the Electricity Industry GF....... that is a prime example of "competition" in action. I agree, the price of ADSL will not tumble. I think it will pretty well stay the same. Electricity companies have not exactly fallen over themselves to provide a marked price difference. The opposite in fact. Contact puts its prices up, and the rest follow suit. In much the same way as the Petrol Companies. In NewZealand, competition does not equate to lower prices. Nor better service. We are still slaves to paying through the teeth Any of you kids at school reading this - ask the bill payer	Baldy (26)
176266	2003-09-21 00:06:00	> Any of you kids at school reading this - ask the bill payer Well actually, the vast majority of children are now on holiday. So physically we aren't actually at school, though again, the vast majority of us still attend school so technically are "at school", so to speak. Anyway, some children do actually help to pay the bills - they're made to pay lodging to their parents. I don't think that this case is widespread, but it certainly does exist, so it isn't exactly right to assume parents pay the entire bill.	agent (30)
176267	2003-09-21 00:48:00	The difference is we all need electricity,Cant go without it,so the companies can rort the prices and dont need to undercut each other. As far as brodband goes,we can vote with our pockets and just choose to stay on dial-up,At which point someone will have to offer a good priced deal to get the unwashed masses to sign up. As it stands i think less then 2% of users use jetstart,I cant see that changing unless something of value is placed on the table.	metla (154)
176268	2003-09-21 00:55:00	> > Any of you kids at school reading this - ask the > bill payer > > Well actually, the vast majority of children are now > on holiday. So physically we aren't actually at > school, though again, the vast majority of us still > attend school so technically are "at school", so to > speak. > > Anyway, some children do actually help to pay the > bills - they're made to pay lodging to their parents. > I don't think that this case is widespread, but it > certainly does exist, so it isn't exactly right to > assume parents pay the entire bill. Whether you are at School, or on holiday you are still schoolkids. I don't think there would be too many children in NZ who would pay lodgings or help pay the household accounts. Having said that, I paid for my own highschool uniform from my milkrun earnings, when I used to get up at 4am 7days a week. The point about "asking the bill payer" was to ask your parents about the bad old days of Telecom when you had to go on the waiting list just to get a telephone. If they lived in NZ 20years ago that is.	Baldy (26)
1 2