<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>There is no one solution</title>
		<description>Comments for There is no one solution at http://unreasonablemen.net , comment 1 to 5 out of 5 comments</description>
		<link>http://unreasonablemen.net</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 20:11:12 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FeedCreator 1.7.2</generator>
		<item>
			<title>TV shouldn\'t pay for fiber</title>
			<link>http://unreasonablemen.net/index.php/Blogs/There-is-no-one-solution.html#comment-158</link>
			<description>The way they pay for it in Norway/Sweden is by having the end-user pay for it. An investment of around 2500 euro roughly translates to 30 euro a month at 70% penetration. In some places users are digging fibre trenches themselves because they are too far of the road. 

As said in the OECD report, you really shouldn\'t have services pay for the network part. The network part in itself can be paid by a monthly fee easily. Mixing services and networks leads to all kinds of competitive distortions. 

So can you do this in NZ at a reasonable monthly price. Yes you can. provided you have users pay for the network and not for something else. It takes 10-15 years to build a network. A bit of subsidy from the government might take the edge of the monthly fees and bob\'s your uncle. 

This may sound very simplistic, but networks are 90% fixed costs. If it was a good idea to build an electricity network that can only provide one service, than an investment in a fibre network will be absolutely no different. If you compare the monthly price/monthly income ratio for fibre, you\'ll see that you\'re better off then when we started rolling out electricity. - Rudolf van der Berg</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:32:06 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://unreasonablemen.net/index.php/Blogs/There-is-no-one-solution.html#comment-136</link>
			<description>Hi Rudolf &amp; Ben,

This is all interesting stuff, Rudolf i'd like to hear more about how those scandanavian countries are funding their deployments.

is it because they have high GDP 
Is it because of climatic issues
is it because they charge high rates for TV content?

I chatted briefly off line with Ben about this. In our country total TV revenue might be 3-400mill pa. 
A Fibre to the home deployment is anywhere between 4-10 billion depending on coverage. How is that going to offer a payback to shareholder investment? - Paul</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:45:11 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Look at Norway and the OECD Fibre report</title>
			<link>http://unreasonablemen.net/index.php/Blogs/There-is-no-one-solution.html#comment-134</link>
			<description>Last week I was at the OECD fibre conference in Stavanger, where Lyse Tele explained that they regularly see users use up to 80Mbit/s when watching HD streams. One for the PVR, One for main TV, two for the kids tv\'s = 4*20Mbit/s. Norwegian TV is broadcasting standard definition at 11 Mbit/s 

Herman Wagter of Citynet Amsterdam showed that in order to send 500Kbyte from one user to the other and back and make it feel like real time (under 200 milliseconds) you need at least 40Mbit/s both ways with alot of overhead, so that other stuff doesn\'t interfere. 

The new OECD report, Developments in Fibre Technologies and Investment, is available from www.oecd.org/dataoecd/49/8/40390735.pdf. The OECD also has a Broadband Portal at www.oecd.org/sti/ict/broadband
The OECD assumes a minimum of 50Mbit/s to and 10Mbit/s from the User. - Rudolf</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:07:47 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://unreasonablemen.net/index.php/Blogs/There-is-no-one-solution.html#comment-132</link>
			<description>Just a another quick point.  I was also like you a while ago in the belief that I was unsure of the benefit that Broadband would offer and the wooly statements that people were making about changing lives.  
A year on, and I think my views have changed a little.   Clearly the reason I didnt think like this was because I had no reference point to see what it would be like.  Since getting 25mbps internet, effectivly unlimited downloads, my (myself and wife) have fundamentally changed the way we live.  We now have many more connected devices that pole the internet, cameras that you can view of home from work, DVR that download content to HDD or stream online.  The reality is that most people cant see the future so this is why they dont ask for broadband. But once they have it then things start to happen, and one purchase at a time, you start to use new services, to thte point where you wondered how you lived without it.  This is a consumer view for sure, but the same applies to businesses.  We now use online email and collaboration tools, various SaaS platforms and other things.  Not even possible over dialup. - BC</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 14:25:11 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>free fibre based broadband</title>
			<link>http://unreasonablemen.net/index.php/Blogs/There-is-no-one-solution.html#comment-131</link>
			<description>I heard an interesting point from someone the other day. In some countries the price you could get for all the copper in the ground would more than cover the removal cost and installation of fibre.  Why then is anyone worried about the cost of Fibre to the Home. We just need a short term investment to get the stuff out of the ground, sold and then we can all have GB internet. - BC</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 14:19:20 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
