Fibre: Secunda Community

[Henry.de.kock]

Don't think 123net will roll out anywhere besides their current place.

Do you fall into an area for telkom LTE as theirs is cheaper.

No one spoke of 123net? I was talkin about handing out pamphlets to get people to sign up on the secundafibre website. He was asking what that would cost me.... well will print a 100 papers and find out.

 

[quantic]

We lost. Nothing more to say or do , just not enough demand in Secunda. People are content with their 2 meg line to download their pirated movies and series . Thats all she wrote.

 

[Henry.de.kock]

Because you want them to be. But fine, give up. Not gonna tell you how to live your life. GL with the future.

Alex you can close the thread now.

 

[Swa]

People keep saying to go with Vuma. If Vuma wanted to roll out in Secunda they could. They know the interest is there. But as someone said they are going for where the infrastructure is. It's about the low hanging fruit even if they have to fall over each other to get there and the returns will be abysmal. 123Net has been the only provider to actually show a damn bit of interest in Secunda.

 

[thatdamnJoe]

Interesting tidbit : Secunda's telkom exchange has a 400 Meg line, average usage at around 250meg. Just need to fix their last mile links to my house then I can go to 20mbps - more than enough for current needs.

 

[eddief1]

Interesting tidbit : Secunda's telkom exchange has a 400 Meg line, average usage at around 250meg. Just need to fix their last mile links to my house then I can go to 20mbps - more than enough for current needs.

They wont upgrade the copper as it's more expensive doing that than just going straight to fibre

 

[Henry.de.kock]

They wont upgrade anything. They are just too ****ing lazy, and as @Swa stated, they would all just rather fall over each other then go to the next area to cover it. How some of these businesses still exist, I dont know. Fibre would not just be a dream for S.A if the companies just used their ****ing brains, bu they dont have any apparently.

 

[eddief1]

They wont upgrade anything. They are just too ****ing lazy, and as @Swa stated, they would all just rather fall over each other then go to the next area to cover it. How some of these businesses still exist, I dont know. Fibre would not just be a dream for S.A if the companies just used their ****ing brains, bu they dont have any apparently.

It's not that simple henry. These companies don't have infinite resources (including telkom), and to be honest if i look at the secunda fibre website the problem you guys have is subscriber density, yes you have 400 signups for ftth in secunda, but that number means nothing as those subscribers are way far apart..remember if you pass a house you got to make provision for that house even if they don't take right now...and that is your guys problem there, you have to make provision for a block of like 100 houses and only 5-10 in that area want..it does not make sense.

However from what I see regarding your DFA rings there are other options there.

 

[Henry.de.kock]

It's not that simple henry. These companies don't have infinite resources (including telkom), and to be honest if i look at the secunda fibre website the problem you guys have is subscriber density, yes you have 400 signups for ftth in secunda, but that number means nothing as those subscribers are way far apart..remember if you pass a house you got to make provision for that house even if they don't take right now...and that is your guys problem there, you have to make provision for a block of like 100 houses and only 5-10 in that area want..it does not make sense.

However from what I see regarding your DFA rings there are other options there.

The thing is there is a very dense bit that they could roll out to. I mentioned this same thing in this thread before, but will do so again.
If the company invest in that small portion (dense part) of people, it would be much easier to convince the rest of the people to sign up, since they would have proof of how the current setup can and will benefit them. Most of the people is uninformed and believe that fibre is more expensive then copper, which is not true. Again that could be rectified by the proof. All they see is the installation fee then they run, because " I already have adsl so what does fibre offer me more then what copper does, to warrant the installation fee?"

You tell me that they dont have infinite resources, and I hear you, but that same valuable resources they could spend on connecting people that have not been connected yet, they then go and waste on a area already covered by fibre, in which best case scenario they have a bunch of "maybe they chose us" sign ups, where in the area where they are the only ones, they could have guaranteed signups (all depending on quality of service mind you). So how does that make sense??

The DFA thing..... uhm the ISP's are just too frikken scared to try something with that, you send them emails, they respond with mumbo jumbo, you then reply to them pointing out that they are trying to bull**** you, then they dont respond after that.... The DFA cable is literally 300m away from my house, but it just lays there, not used at all.

As for telkom.... well they are the most useless of them all, the other companies have to dig trenches and **** so yes it is expensive to start the installation... well telkom have a whole network of trenches already, yet they dont want to roll out, and only does so where other companies already did.... well guess they need to ride the gravy train.

At this stage I have more faith in 123net, at least their CEO was here and tried to explain their plan for Secunda (yes it never did become a reality), but it sure as hell is 1brazillion times more then what any other ****ing CEO tried to do to market their fibre.

 

[eddief1]

The thing is there is a very dense bit that they could roll out to. I mentioned this same thing in this thread before, but will do so again.
If the company invest in that small portion (dense part) of people, it would be much easier to convince the rest of the people to sign up, since they would have proof of how the current setup can and will benefit them. Most of the people is uninformed and believe that fibre is more expensive then copper, which is not true. Again that could be rectified by the proof.

I agree 100%, you spot on. But you have failed to take into account the back-haul costs to say teraco,(and contracts one is required to sign to get said back-haul) it's a catch 22, back-haul prices are cheaper the more you take (significantly cheaper!), you take too little (IE do a small area) there is a high (almost certain) chance you can't compete with ADSL and the ftth becomes stupid expensive just because of back-haul

All they see is the installation fee then they run, because " I already have adsl so what does fibre offer me more then what copper does, to warrant the installation fee?"

Well then to get subscribers on board you need to do the install for free to grab the existing ADSL clients, and this is pretty easy but requires consumers to sign a 2 year contract to offset the risks of deploying the fibre...are people willing to do this?

You tell me that they dont have infinite resources, and I hear you, but that same valuable resources they could spend on connecting people that have not been connected yet, they then go and waste on a area already covered by fibre, in which best case scenario they have a bunch of "maybe they chose us" sign ups, where in the area where they are the only ones, they could have guaranteed signups (all depending on quality of service mind you). So how does that make sense??

Once again, I agree, it seems stupid from the outside, but they have done the math and it's viable for them, they each have their own unique business models and for whatever reason (closer, cheaper available back-haul, high income clients, easy build routes) it makes sense for them to overbuild in those area's instead of coming to secunda (else they would not be doing it, trust me) FTTH is a numbers game period, and those numbers yourself or other people in this thread don't have access too, so don't try make any sense of it because you can't without knowing the numbers.

The DFA thing..... uhm the ISP's are just too frikken scared to try something with that, you send them emails, they respond with mumbo jumbo, you then reply to them pointing out that they are trying to bull**** you, then they dont respond after that.... The DFA cable is literally 300m away from my house, but it just lays there, not used at all.

ISP's won't go on risk right now for a maybe, they don't have to take risk right now as there are hundreds of other area's where they can build which makes complete business sense, for example you have 400 people in secunda, they can get 400 subscribers by doing two or three estates which have existing ducts. Why would they come to secunda and have to lay 10's of KM's of duct when they can achieve quicker ROI without digging one trench in other area's, this will change over time as saturation nears but for now they have better places to spend their capital on.

I cant stress enough guys, it's all about the money, what makes sense and what does not.

As for telkom.... well they are the most useless of them all, the other companies have to dig trenches and **** so yes it is expensive to start the installation... well telkom have a whole network of trenches already, yet they dont want to roll out, and only does so where other companies already did.... well guess they need to ride the gravy train.

What other internet options do customers have in secunda other than ADSL, probably none. So why would Telkom invest millions when in the end thay are not going to make more revenue from that area, they wont until they have competition and start loosing clients, it's the reason why they over build other ftth operations, it's not to make more money, it's simply to try hold onto their existing ADSL base and stop them from moving and losing them revenue. They don't have incentive to fibre up secunda because why spend more money when it is not going to make you more.

At this stage I have more faith in 123net, at least their CEO was here and tried to explain their plan for Secunda (yes it never did become a reality), but it sure as hell is 1brazillion times more then what any other ****ing CEO tried to do to market their fibre.

They didn't do their homework and when they did they realised the numbers didn't add up, shown by the fact their minimum uptake increased.

 

[DERoestorf]

@Henry.de.kock

In JHB, the provider needs about 30% of the suburb to sign up, for them to break even. Now given where secunda is, I would estimate, that number would probably increase to about 60% to just cover the costs, but lets go with 45%.

You currently have 400homes signed up, how many houses are there in secunda? 3000 - 5000 homes, give or take? That means you are not even at a 10% sign up number at this stage.

 

[Henry.de.kock]

I agree 100%, you spot on. But you have failed to take into account the back-haul costs to say teraco,(and contracts one is required to sign to get said back-haul) it's a catch 22, back-haul prices are cheaper the more you take (significantly cheaper!), you take too little (IE do a small area) there is a high (almost certain) chance you can't compete with ADSL and the ftth becomes stupid expensive just because of back-haul

Again, if their service is decent it wont take that long, you must spend money to make money.

Well then to get subscribers on board you need to do the install for free to grab the existing ADSL clients, and this is pretty easy but requires consumers to sign a 2 year contract to offset the risks of deploying the fibre...are people willing to do this?

If they are the only ones willing to roll out to Secunda, then people will sign the 2 year contract, but again if their service is crappy with the first group of people, they wont get people to sign a contract.

Once again, I agree, it seems stupid from the outside, but they have done the math and it's viable for them, they each have their own unique business models and for whatever reason (closer, cheaper available back-haul, high income clients, easy build routes) it makes sense for them to overbuild in those area's instead of coming to secunda (else they would not be doing it, trust me) FTTH is a numbers game period, and those numbers yourself or other people in this thread don't have access too, so don't try make any sense of it because you can't without knowing the numbers.

They can have bigger numbers if they just make the move, but they only see what they want to see. Ok thanks for the advise, wont try to understand the numbers, since I cant access them =(.

ISP's won't go on risk right now for a maybe, they don't have to take risk right now as there are hundreds of other area's where they can build which makes complete business sense, for example you have 400 people in secunda, they can get 400 subscribers by doing two or three estates which have existing ducts. Why would they come to secunda and have to lay 10's of KM's of duct when they can achieve quicker ROI without digging one trench in other area's, this will change over time as saturation nears but for now they have better places to spend their capital on.

So why do they require a certain number of signups then if they would then much rather roll out to another place? it is false advertising... "You can get fibre if x% sign up in your town.... soz x% also signed in JHB so we will rather go there...", it does not say " You can get fibre if x% sign up in your town, provided that JHB dont also get x% signups...". Well nothing we could do about it, so pointless point I am trying to make. Please that word Business sense..... now that is the exact oppisite of common sense!! You not maybe part of Sasol management? Throwing that word business sense around like that makes me feel like you are =P.

I cant stress enough guys, it's all about the money, what makes sense and what does not.



What other internet options do customers have in secunda other than ADSL, probably none. So why would Telkom invest millions when in the end thay are not going to make more revenue from that area, they wont until they have competition and start loosing clients, it's the reason why they over build other ftth operations, it's not to make more money, it's simply to try hold onto their existing ADSL base and stop them from moving and losing them revenue. They don't have incentive to fibre up secunda because why spend more money when it is not going to make you more.

They are going to make more money, because they can connect those that dont even have access to adsl and people will take faster line speeds (a bit more expensive) than they have now since copper doesnt function well (at frikkin all) over a long distance.

They didn't do their homework and when they did they realised the numbers didn't add up, shown by the fact their minimum uptake increased.

Again, I have more faith in them then the rest of the so called "players".

 

[Henry.de.kock]

@Henry.de.kock

In JHB, the provider needs about 30% of the suburb to sign up, for them to break even. Now given where secunda is, I would estimate, that number would probably increase to about 60% to just cover the costs, but lets go with 45%.

You currently have 400homes signed up, how many houses are there in secunda? 3000 - 5000 homes, give or take? That means you are not even at a 10% sign up number at this stage.

uhm well ...... nvm no even gonna reply. Thanks for the advise =P

 

[eddief1]

@Henry.de.kock ok, im trying to help you guys here because i honestly believe there are other options which can make this viable for you guys, there are many different ways to deploy fibre and the bigger guys do it a certain way which is not necessary the best way for a specific area, they just use a generic model, deploying fibre is not rocket science.

so lets start here, how many houses in your subscriber area, not people who want....plots, has anyone counted?

 

[Henry.de.kock]

Thanks for trying to help (not sarcastic at all.). It is more than what plenty are trying to do.

I am not sure, I think is is posted here in this thread somewhere.... cant find it now, also had a website that tracked it, cant remember that as well (well now I am not helping...).

Again, the problem is to get the people to sign up, since no one explains to them the benefit of FTTH. Who would you rather believe, a company (isp) telling you the benefits of FTTH or some random dude on the street? I dont see any advertising of FTTH from any company, so us trying to convince the masses is futile, since the won believe us. Yes family and friends, but secunda is not that small that every one here is family or friends (contrary to popular believe).

 

[eddief1]

according to 2011 census data there are 10292 "households", i guess that includes the lower income people who wont take fibre, so we can maybe half that ?

 

[Swa]

It's not that simple henry. These companies don't have infinite resources (including telkom), and to be honest if i look at the secunda fibre website the problem you guys have is subscriber density, yes you have 400 signups for ftth in secunda, but that number means nothing as those subscribers are way far apart..remember if you pass a house you got to make provision for that house even if they don't take right now...and that is your guys problem there, you have to make provision for a block of like 100 houses and only 5-10 in that area want..it does not make sense.

However from what I see regarding your DFA rings there are other options there.

Not really the case. It could be 400 or 4000 signups and it would not make a difference. The largest cost is with backhaul. Once you have an area connected you can easily add more from neighbouring areas without it costing much more. The larger an area gets the more signups you need but the less dense those signups have to be.

The way things are going we have multiple providers going for the same areas and duplicating infrastructure to get a slice of a pie that's getting fractionally smaller each time. See it this way. You have one provider in an area it gets 100% of the subscriber density. When another provider enters it becomes 50% of subscriber density. If you have 3 providers that goes down to only 33%. It does not make financial sense. The reason they are doing it is short sightedness of going for areas that can easily be connected.

At least some are seeing the benefit though of going for areas that are not connected yet where they can get a faster return on capital. MTN is considering rolling out to our area and they don't even need any pre-signups for doing so. The problem with that is... well, it's MTN! I would much rather prefer it to be someone like 123Net.

They didn't do their homework and when they did they realised the numbers didn't add up, shown by the fact their minimum uptake increased.

Not really how it went down. 123Net still wants to roll out in these areas but they and their investor are hamstrung by cash. Vumatel has had a large cash injection from a bank without any risk to themselves, the only reason being they are BEE. 123Net on the other hand are private entrepreneurs and have to go with what they get. If you're a private individual you have to take on all the risk and give personal guarantees. Just one more way we are being screwed over in this country by policies.

 

[eddief1]

Not really the case. It could be 400 or 4000 signups and it would not make a difference. The largest cost is with backhaul. Once you have an area connected you can easily add more from neighbouring areas without it costing much more. The larger an area gets the more signups you need but the less dense those signups have to be.

Agreed that the largest MONTHLY cost is backhaul, and also agree that adding neighbouring areas does not increase said backhaul costs, but we not talking about backhaul here, that is the easy part (you have DFA), we talking trenching and physical work to drop fibre off at each house (capital) and it does not matter which way you slice it, the denser the better in that regard. You not exactly going to trench say 5KM worth of road at a cost of approx 2Mil for 10 clients

The way things are going we have multiple providers going for the same areas and duplicating infrastructure to get a slice of a pie that's getting fractionally smaller each time. See it this way. You have one provider in an area it gets 100% of the subscriber density. When another provider enters it becomes 50% of subscriber density. If you have 3 providers that goes down to only 33%. It does not make financial sense. The reason they are doing it is short sightedness of going for areas that can easily be connected.

You said it "going for areas that can easily be connected" hence cheaper to connect, hence less subscribers required for decent ROI so splitting it say 3 ways still makes sense.

At least some are seeing the benefit though of going for areas that are not connected yet where they can get a faster return on capital. MTN is considering rolling out to our area and they don't even need any pre-signups for doing so. The problem with that is... well, it's MTN! I would much rather prefer it to be someone like 123Net.

Disagree, just because you the only provider does not guarantee a faster return, it really all depends how much you have to fork out to drop fibre into the houses for that specific area. MTN, well they got the luxury (and money) to take on risk, the smaller guys don't.

Not really how it went down. 123Net still wants to roll out in these areas but they and their investor are hamstrung by cash. Vumatel has had a large cash injection from a bank without any risk to themselves, the only reason being they are BEE. 123Net on the other hand are private entrepreneurs and have to go with what they get. If you're a private individual you have to take on all the risk and give personal guarantees. Just one more way we are being screwed over in this country by policies.

Didn't know this...sad story indeed, but still maintain they did not quite do their homework

 

[Henry.de.kock]

Disagree, just because you the only provider does not guarantee a faster return, it really all depends how much you have to fork out to drop fibre into the houses for that specific area. MTN, well they got the luxury (and money) to take on risk, the smaller guys don't.



Didn't know this...sad story indeed, but still maintain they did not quite do their homework

It does depend on how much you fork out, but also depends on how your service is... Again, if your service is good and your price is right you WILL 100% guaranteed make your money back. So yea I will say it guarantees a faster return, the providers just doesnt want to work for their money, they want it handed to them. I also say it will not be a risk if you do it properly, but like everything on SA it will be done half arsed.... then again with the crime rate and how much our police service is actually helping, it is a huge risk =(.

123net is making allot of progress, I really take my hat off to them, they will still make allot of big company's blush, just give them some time. (still salty though ;/ )

 

[eddief1]

Why don't you guys do it yourself Target a block, put some switches in a IP68 outdoor enclosure and run fibre down the roads for that block, create rings using MPLS and utilise DFA where you can for connecting nodes and backhaul, hardest part is digging which I am sure someone locally can do