NZ fibre puts many countries to shame

[R0ADK1LL]

https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/109928672/fewer-than-4000-homes-will-be-without-access-to-governmentbacked-broadband-in-four-years

 

Many people like to talk about how the free market is best but NZ's government sponsored plan to roll out high speed internet to almost the entire country is going pretty well. Compare it to the US where a handful of companies have their own monopolies and refuse to upgrade the infrastructure, despite having received tax breaks for that specific purpose.

 

NZ is a challenging environment to roll out this kind of infrastructure because of the low population. Economies of scale don't really kick in with such a spread out population. It's good to see the government continuing to look to the future and provide people with the benefits high speed internet can provide.

[Cyracus]

When you compare other places to the US it's something stupid like how we spend more on our military than anywhere, or we're at the mercy of a corrupt government... and sometimes there's legitimate good things

 

[Drak3]

18 minutes ago, R0ADK1LL said:

Many people like to talk about how the free market is best

 

18 minutes ago, R0ADK1LL said:

Compare it to the US where a handful of companies have their own monopolies and refuse to upgrade the infrastructure

Internet in the majority of the US isn't free market.

 

It also ignores the fact that NZ doesn't have to content with the same land mass as the US does.

[Guest]

IDK what this is trying to say but NZ is a hole for internet and real estate.

[vetali]

12 minutes ago, Cyracus said:

When you compare other places to the US it's something stupid like how we spend more on our military than anywhere, or we're at the mercy of a corrupt government... and sometimes there's legitimate good things

 

Cost of a country living in paranoia.

 

Plus I'd rather not have the government any closer to "running the internet" than they already are. 

[Billy Pilgrim]

36 minutes ago, R0ADK1LL said:

Compare it to the US where a handful of companies have their own monopolies

 

16 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Internet in the majority of the US isn't free market.

Doesn't Monopoly kind of take away the point of a free market?

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, Billy Pilgrim said:

 

Doesn't Monopoly kind of take away the point of a free market?

Does it matter? Most of the "monopolies" are the result of idiotic government regulation.

[GoldenLag]

Sorry, cant hear you over Nordic Model Fiber optic cable and service providers.

 

Nordic Duopoly ftw. 

[Cyracus]

17 minutes ago, vetali said:

Plus I'd rather not have the government any closer to "running the internet" than they already are. 

I don't necessarily want them running the internet, but I wouldn't object to them building the infrastructure

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

 

Internet in the majority of the US isn't free market.

 

It also ignores the fact that NZ doesn't have to content with the same land mass as the US does.

It also doesn't mention Nightcaps is in the middle of nowhere around hour and a half from the nearest main centre. Its good if you don't commute anywhere and love the pub. 160k is not a steal. Compare that with the average price of housing in the main centres; Auckland - 1.2 Million; Wellington - 800k; Christchurch - 500k; Dunedin - 420k; Queenstown - 1.2 Million. There is no place in NZ where I can see myself buying a house that's worth the money in 20 years. 

 

The fibre rollout in NZ is managed by one company called Chorus. They are pretty slack, if you don't have fibre already setup in your house it takes more than 3 months on the waiting list to get a technician to come and install the box. New Zealand also only has two real internet providers, and companies that run off their infrastructure, same with the phone companies. 

 

New Zealand is not a good place either if you are foreign. 

[vetali]

8 minutes ago, Cyracus said:

I don't necessarily want them running the internet, but I wouldn't object to them building the infrastructure

Eh, just need to regulate the big companies more instead of being ignorant or turning a blind eye. 

[Belgarathian]

5 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

It also doesn't mention Nightcaps is in the middle of nowhere around hour and a half from the nearest main centre. Its good if you don't commute anywhere and love the pub. 160k is not a steal. Compare that with the average price of housing in the main centres; Auckland - 1.2 Million; Wellington - 800k; Christchurch - 500k; Dunedin - 420k; Queenstown - 1.2 Million. There is no place in NZ where I can see myself buying a house that's worth the money in 20 years. 

 

The fibre rollout in NZ is managed by one company called Chorus. They are pretty slack, if you don't have fibre already setup in your house it takes more than 3 months on the waiting list to get a technician to come and install the box. New Zealand also only has two real internet providers, and companies that run off their infrastructure, same with the phone companies. 

 

New Zealand is not a good place either if you are foreign. 

 

Somewhat incorrect. It's managed by a crown entity and then Chrous has tendered for the work in different regions. Christchurch has Enable, and then there are a number of other players. But it boils down to there is only one entity putting comms cables in the ground with the Government controlling resale pricing per connection.

 

No remotely significant companies (that I'm aware of) other than fixed wireless broadband providers or a few smaller players that have laid fiber in subdivisions sell connections and services directly to the consumer. All major ISPs simply resell connections & services from Chrous, Enable, etc.

 

Telecom (now Spark) used to own the majority of the copper network, but in a world first in 2011 they voted to split the network and customer services so that Chorus (the network spin-off) could publicly list on the NZX and secure $1b of government funding to lay fiber and start the rollout.

[aezakmi]

my country still uses 28.8k and 56k in semi-rural areas

 

 

 

let that sink in

[airdeano]

yeah, lets keep the topic of NZ and fiber not country politics as a whole.

<-thread cleaned->

[williamcll]

Twin 1Gbps (1 2Gbps to a modem with only gigabit ethernet ports) is now available everywhere in Hong Kong.

 

1Gbps is also less than 40 USD per month here also, and that's without discounts.

[captain_to_fire]

5 hours ago, R0ADK1LL said:

Many people like to talk about how the free market is best but NZ's government sponsored plan to roll out high speed internet to almost the entire country is going pretty well.

This thread makes @leadeater happy. 

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, captain_to_fire said:

This thread makes @leadeater happy. 

What makes me even more happy is all the jealous Aussies 

[captain_to_fire]

Just now, leadeater said:

What makes me even more happy is all the jealous Aussies 

I once watched a video saying that Australia donated sports awards to NZ for the 15th straight year https://youtu.be/70o6xDfGpe8?t=160

 

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

The fibre rollout in NZ is managed by one company called Chorus.

There's actually a number of LFC deploying UFB but Chorus is the largest by a significant margin. Most of the internet here is run by Vocus, turn Vocus off and you turn the internet off for the country pretty much.

[Carclis]

10 minutes ago, leadeater said:

What makes me even more happy is all the jealous Aussies 

I just got a 50Mbit connection recently and that's after 10 years of waiting. So I've been jealous for a very long time

[Stefan Payne]

I wonder if my Fibre line is coming. I doubt it but who knows...

Right now it looks bleak, there was an Article in the Local News Paper...

 

But who am I to complain, I already got 100MBit down, it would just be an upgrade to 500MBit...

 

And if I get it, I'd be freed by one Corporate overlord, as its done by what we call "Zweckverband" (its a local company that works for the people, to provide a product not make money).

[leadeater]

4 hours ago, Drak3 said:

It also ignores the fact that NZ doesn't have to content with the same land mass as the US does.

Landmass really does not matter, population density and spread matters more. It's all about proportion not size, in a standard size small island but with only 2 people who live on opposite sides of that island the per household connection cost would be vastly more than any town, state, country etc.

 

Land area NZ is similar to Oregon but we have a bit more population. Unlike Oregon which is a nice square NZ is long and narrow and comprised of two main islands, if I were an ISP I'd rather deal with Oregon than NZ land wise.

[XR6]

15 minutes ago, Carclis said:

I just got a 50Mbit connection recently and that's after 10 years of waiting. So I've been jealous for a very long time

I feel your pain.. fibre has only recently started to become widespread here. I have 100Mbps atm but not too long ago I only had 5Mbps.

 

[mynameisjuan]

I would say good job but New Zealand is literally half the area of Texas and about equal to Colorado. To fucking compare how the US needs to take note is a joke. 

 

But people will still live in La-La land that everything can be overhauled and migrated in a snap of a finger with money.

 

[Belgarathian]

17 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

I would say good job but New Zealand is literally half the area of Texas and about equal to Colorado. To fucking compare how the US needs to take note is a joke. 

 

But people will still live in La-La land that everything can be overhauled and migrated in a snap of a finger with money.

 

You've got 325 million people and higher population density compared to New Zealand. Not to mention you already have the fiber backbone across the country to support it.

 

The problem you have is politicians bought by telcos, 50 years of policy setting paid for by telcos, and state regulation to top off the terrible cake with some icing. A starting point would be mandating that all ISPs must wholesale their network and then set caps on what the ISP can charge per connection. It would be a safe bet to say that it's cheaper for the telcos to keep you on your aging copper network and to continue to oversell your local exchange for ADSL and VDSL services than to make the investment in laying fiber.

 

Some states/cities have tried to provide municipal broadband but got sued to oblivion by Comcast, etc. and prevented/blocked by the FCC