Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 78930	2007-05-02 22:49:00	Telecom announces huge profit, but coy on broadband investment	Chris Keall (10417)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
546443	2007-05-02 22:49:00	Read Chairman Wayne Boyd's comments about Yellow Pages profits not necessarily going to broadband upgrades here (blogs.pcworld.co.nz).	Chris Keall (10417)
546444	2007-05-03 04:09:00	Read Chairman Wayne Boyd's comments about Yellow Pages profits not necessarily going to broadband upgrades here (blogs.pcworld.co.nz). And why should it. They are a private company and are free to invest where they want to, and where it will return then most their shareholders. We need government investment for real cable based broadband, and wifi in the rural areas.	rogerp (6864)
546445	2007-05-03 04:43:00	Why? The infrastructure assets taxpayers have paid for were given away to "free enterprise". We were promised that the market would ensure that all the necessary investments for future needs would be made.. So now we are to pay for the developments so the "market players" can increase their profits?	Graham L (2)
546446	2007-05-03 05:34:00	Why? The infrastructure assets taxpayers have paid for were given away to "free enterprise". We were promised that the market would ensure that all the necessary investments for future needs would be made.. So now we are to pay for the developments so the "market players" can increase their profits? No, the government sold the assets to a private company for what was at the time a fair market price. You can't get something back after you have sold it. When it was sold, there was no such thing as the internet, or broadband. We don't need telecom to have broadband in NZ. The fact is that real decent broadband needs fibre optic cable, which is something telecom don't and never have provided, they only have an outdate copper line infrastructure which is only good for ADSL type networks, which is now becoming outdated. For infrastructure investments, it does require government spending, as can be seen with NZs other infrastructure problems, which are infact worse than or telecommunications. For example or elctricity infrastructure, our rail infrastructure, our roading infrastructure etc, are all going to require major government spending, due to the private sector not being able to invest enough for a return on their investment..	rogerp (6864)
546447	2007-05-03 06:05:00	Taurine excreta. The assets were sold at theft prices. We were assured that the market would provide the investment. Prices for services have trebled or quadrupled. The investment has not materialised. The returns to shareholders have.	Graham L (2)
546448	2007-05-03 06:12:00	Right now Telecom is between a rock and a hard place. The old business model of getting hundreds of millions in revenue for fixed line calls no longer exists, although the old hardware from that era still does. In their current position and with current hardware Telecom is not able to keep up with the change that has taken place over the last 5 or so years due to under investment in the network in favour of dividends to share holders. Would Telecom see a decent ROI on the billion dollars they would need to invest in order to bring the countries networks up to scratch- possibly but they would have to employ a different method of thinking from what they are doing right now. They need to think outside the box for once.. Would the investment in a decent network benefit the technological development of this country? Yes, it could encourage large over seas corporates to either locate some of their research plants here and video conference, Imagine what it would do for the film industry.... We could become more of a hi tech and design orientated country than we are now without people having to go over seas. The UK is a good example of this with Microsoft sponsoring large research facilities at a number of universities. There are also a large number of Tech companies located in Redding just west of London. Imagine what it could do for our engineering and science graduates.... I doubt it will happen but dreams are free... just a thought.	winmacguy (3367)
546449	2007-05-03 06:14:00	It seems that back last century when this country was just getting on its feet, investment in infrastructure such as the copper phone network, the railway system, roads, building et al wasn't the monumental cost that it is today. We were a much smaller nation, yet we managed to send power around the country, build hydro dams, get the railway from north to south and set up a basic telecommunications network. The modern technology seems to have outstripped the ability for people to pay for it, or the want for large corporates to invest in it. I am tired of constantly hearing people say "oh but the shareholders .. shareholders this, shareholders that, have to get a better return for the shareholders.. blah blah blah. Sure, if they are investing, then they deserve a return, but NOT at the expense of the consumer who is the very person who is ensuring the existence and long-term profitability of that company in the first place. If companies like Telecom stopped giving away so much of the ill-gotten gains they make from the poor consumer, spent less money on trashy radio and TV advertising for crappy products we neither want nor need and invested it in real infrastructure like fibre networks, they'd be investing in a concept that would return them far more in the long term. Seems they just can't see that.	supertrouper (6665)
546450	2007-05-03 07:17:00	It seems that back last century when this country was just getting on its feet, investment in infrastructure such as the copper phone network, the railway system, roads, building et al wasn't the monumental cost that it is today. We were a much smaller nation, yet we managed to send power around the country, build hydro dams, get the railway from north to south and set up a basic telecommunications network. The modern technology seems to have outstripped the ability for people to pay for it, or the want for large corporates to invest in it. I am tired of constantly hearing people say "oh but the shareholders .. shareholders this, shareholders that, have to get a better return for the shareholders.. blah blah blah. Sure, if they are investing, then they deserve a return, but NOT at the expense of the consumer who is the very person who is ensuring the existence and long-term profitability of that company in the first place. If companies like Telecom stopped giving away so much of the ill-gotten gains they make from the poor consumer, spent less money on trashy radio and TV advertising for crappy products we neither want nor need and invested it in real infrastructure like fibre networks, they'd be investing in a concept that would return them far more in the long term. Seems they just can't see that. They advertise because it works for them, and it obviouly provides a good ROI. You have to remember that Telecom are now a privately owned company, and not a public service. Therefore they can basically do what they want, within the bounds of regulation. This is the problem when a governemtn sells a key piece of infrastructure.	rogerp (6864)
546451	2007-05-03 07:19:00	Taurine excreta . The assets were sold at theft prices . We were assured that the market would provide the investment . Prices for services have trebled or quadrupled . The investment has not materialised . The returns to shareholders have . I think the Labour government sold it for about a billion dollars, which back in the late 80's was a huge amount of money . They certainly didn't have their arm twisted to sell it . The market has changed significantly since then .	rogerp (6864)
546452	2007-05-03 07:44:00	They certainly didn't have their arm twisted to sell it . No, but they had an ideological desire to flog it off . Like Max Bradford, they were convinced that the "market" would provide the goods .	decibel (11645)
1 2 3