Broadband Infraco on track

so could this mean faster internet speeds ??
 
Unlike in Sat-3, AWCC consortium members will not collectively set prices for bandwidth. Rather, each participant will be able to take its product to market with its own tariffs. This, Groesbeek says, will help ensure a competitive market in international bandwidth and drive down prices.
Click to expand...

Well at least there is some form of encouragement.
Just a shame that our tax payer money has to be used to fund this project, when surely the private sector would've jumped at this. But then again, we've argued this before :rolleyes: :o

Orginally posted by smb3

so could this mean faster internet speeds ??
Click to expand...

It should be quite significant, yes.
 
as long as pay as you go is regarded as unlimited internet, it doesn't matter how many cables we get...this dungpile we live in is vrot
 
Shake&Bake said:
Just a shame that our tax payer money has to be used to fund this project, when surely the private sector would've jumped at this. But then again, we've argued this before :rolleyes: :o
Click to expand...
Private funded; not tax payers money; see article.
 
I don't mean to sound selfish, but why does every cable that we come up with have to be shared with every other country that might remotely be on the route? Can't we just have one cable that is our own and that we can have to ourselves?
 
Alchemist said:
I don't mean to sound selfish, but why does every cable that we come up with have to be shared with every other country that might remotely be on the route? Can't we just have one cable that is our own and that we can have to ourselves?
Click to expand...
SA doesnt have the cash, and even if we do, it wouldnt be profitable to just supply to one country when they could supply 12 other countries at the same time. This is for the first time starting to look like it might just happen although I doubt the 2010 deadline will be met, but it is looking like it will happen even if it is a lil of schedule.
 
Luckily Seacom is all ready under construction it will definitely make the 2010 deadline. This cable will be good for competition if it materialises.

www.seacom.mu
 
emmanuel said:
Private funded; not tax payers money; see article.
Click to expand...

Broadband Infraco is Alec Erwin's wonderchild.
State owned - tax payer money.

From: http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2007/07112615451002.htm

Address by the Minister of Public Enterprises Alec Erwin at National Council of Provinces on the Broadband Infraco Bill
20 November 2007


This broadband capacity is so strategic to our economy that the State is intervening through the formation of Broadband Infraco. The intervention seeks to address the high cost of broadband in South Africa, by making infrastructure in the national backbone and international connectivity available at cost related prices
Click to expand...


EDIT:

Hell, even the article clearly states that the Broadband Infraco is State owned in the opening paragraph...

Broadband Infraco, the new, state-owned communications infrastructure company, is making significant headway in plans to build a high-capacity submarine cable along the west coast of Africa. The cable, which will be the world’s longest such system, will cost US$510m and is expected to be switched on in time for the 2010 World Cup.
Click to expand...

Infraco holds 26% of AWCC’s equity.
Click to expand...

Reading the article again made me laugh when I read the following:

Infraco will invest $130m in AWCC (proportional to its shareholding) using a mixture of equity and debt funding. “Infraco is a commercial state-owned enterprise with strategic intent,” Groesbeek says. “That means it has to pay its own way and has to borrow money from the commercial market like any other operator. Unlike other operators, though, it doesn’t have a licence to rip people off.”
Click to expand...

Yeah, we know that you all feel you have the God given right ro rip us off! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Shake&Bake said:
Broadband Infraco is Alec Erwin's wonderchild.
State owned - tax payer money.[/URL]

Hell, I'm happy to see something at least for all the money I've paid in tax over the years. With no police force worth mentioning, poor healthcare - almost everything privatised - this is at least something I'll remember to mention when bitching about how little I receive from this government that I don't cough up for personally, again and again.
Click to expand...
 
ic said:
http://mybroadband.co.za/news/Telecoms/3828.htmlOne question, will AWCC offer higher or lower bandwidth pricing compared to SEACOM during the 2010 WC?
Click to expand...

What about after as well? :)

Smith says funding for the system is being provided by a range of local telecom players and will be operated “on open access principles”, meaning no one operator can control access to it.

Infraco has invited telecom infrastructure and value-added network service licensees — typically Internet service providers — to participate in the project. Thirteen companies, most of them South African, have signed the AWCC’s memorandum of understanding.
Click to expand...


If I take this statement at face value, it seems there will be plenty of competition if ISP's will even have direct access to it.
The only thing that could ruin competition would obviously be the wholesale price of the bandwidth. ("Only" used very loosely as Poison Ivy and the DoC are still around)
If AWCC remains true to its "open access principles" then we should truly be in for a steamrolling of competition and lucrative offerings.
With Neotel having sole access to Seacom, they may well find themselves isolated when AWCC comes round.

The 2 cables are really jostling for position and timing now.
Neotel gives no information concerning the reselling of bandwidth only - to us or ISP's.
If I were an ISP, I'd be grinning with anticipation at AWCC's launch.

With Neotel having Seacom themselves, they're likely to have good time with cheap bandwidth. But AWCC will have more capacity, therefore more bandwidth to supply and likely for cheaper as well.

ISP's already have entry into the market and are well established and the last mile does not concern them as they already are in people's homes via Telscum.
To then have direct access to a landing station and supply bandwidth would be painful for Neotel.
What I feel Neotel needs to do is expand their coverage, move away from this bundled rubbish and get ISP's to side with them (if there still is time) and get those ISP's to advertise that they are reselling Neotel bandwidth.

13 companies have signed a "Memorandum of Understanding" - what exaclty that is, I don't know.
What I do know? Is that Neotel is pushing itself into a corner if it does not act quickly to get business partners and customers in line!

Roll on AWCC, roll on!
 
Shake&Bake said:
What about after as well? :)
Click to expand...
Sure, but I would like to know if there is a financial-gain motivation behind the rather sudden guavamental impetus that has been given to AWCC.

IOW whether or not certain people, with hands concealed in cookie jars, believe they can make a lot of money from AWCC bandwidth usage during the 2010 Soccer World Cup.

It's really unusual for a guavamental initiative to suddenly take off with such acceleration after stagnating for such a long time, so I suspect that someone figured out that there is lots of money to be made in a short time period...

PS: AFAIK both SEACOM and EASSy will also be operated according to "open access" principles.
 
ic said:
Sure, but I would like to know if there is a financial-gain motivation behind the rather sudden guavamental impetus that has been given to AWCC.

IOW whether or not certain people, with hands concealed in cookie jars, believe they can make a lot of money from AWCC bandwidth usage during the 2010 Soccer World Cup.

It's really unusual for a guavamental initiative to suddenly take off with such acceleration after stagnating for such a long time, so I suspect that someone figured out that there is lots of money to be made in a short time period...

PS: AFAIK both SEACOM and EASSy will also be operated according to "open access" principles.
Click to expand...


Ahh very interesting indeed yes.
Well its all going to fall on who is gonna "light up" the stadia, media facilities with bandwidth.
Coverage is the name of the game.
It'll be interesting to find out who would be supplying the backhaul for 2010.
Is govt. gonna step in and make sure that all venues are reliant on AWCC?
Will Neotel be able to effectively compete for a share of that pie.
I'd imagine with their existing fibre optic rings in Metro's around the country they're good to go.
But ya never know...

mmm, I remember reading that with the last Cricket World Cup in WI, the media were bitching about the high cost of bandwidth.
I think prices were up more than 5 times what they normally were, just for that period. ( I stand corrected on the "5 times", could be more, could be less)

EDIT: Found something on it...

World Cup internet charges - just not cricket

The slowest wireless service per day is $60 for the six megabyte option. Add $50 to that for once-only set up charges.

Those wanting fixed line access are being asked to pay between $99 and $360 per week, but in a clever twist most journalists have to pay a month's charges to cover the full tournament - even if their team goes home early. Those taking the top of the range service for the full World Cup are being asked to pay a whopping $720 with calls charged made through the line not included.

(At the last Cricket World Cup in South Africa fixed line access was only a token $7 a day.)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X