Neotel outlines fibre-to-the-home strategy

[rpm]

Neotel outlines fibre-to-the-home strategy

Neotel says that, while it has conducted proof of concept trials related to bringing fibre-to-the-home, its focus remains on the enterprise space.

 

[Paul Hjul]

This will, however, require a collaborative approach in the ecosystem that consists of community developers, service providers and end users,

QFT

 

[JStrike]

QFT

Quantum Field Theory?

 

[deweyzeph]

So basically nothing to report here then.

Who gives a crap about gated communities, what really matters is when are companies going to put their heads on the block and provide FTTH to proper suburban houses?

 

[JStrike]

So basically nothing to report here then.

Who gives a crap about gated communities, what really matters is when are companies going to put their heads on the block and provide FTTH to proper suburban houses?

If you chose to live in suburbia, then you chose to get these services after everyone else

 

[deweyzeph]

If you chose to live in suburbia, then you chose to get these services after everyone else

Suburbia is where the vast majority of people who can afford to pay for FTTH live, so without providing for the suburbs FTTH is never going to get off the ground.

 

[Rickster]

Now why does ever provider suddenly want to deploy FTTH? Why not sooner.

 

[JStrike]

Suburbia is where the vast majority of people who can afford to pay for FTTH live, so without providing for the suburbs FTTH is never going to get off the ground.

Well, that's not true. For fibre you want high income and high density. And that describes the City (and related suburbs like Green Point, Sea Point, Clifton, etc). Or a gated community. If you want to live in the burbs, then there are down sides...

 

[Skerminkel]

The group noted, however, that the residential fibre trials were “very promising and Neotel is investigating to bring a product to the market in the residential wholesale space in future”.

“This will, however, require a collaborative approach in the ecosystem that consists of community developers, service providers and end users,” it said.

In summary: We have no news, but don't forget about us.

 

[Paul Hjul]

Quantum Field Theory?

quoted for truth or quite ****ing true


The noise coming from MTN (and VC appears to be declining to indicate that it is on a different path) is to construct a network that is MTN controlled for MTN subscribers - so no ecosystem for other providers. Neotel and Telkom have both been working on building ecosystems for FTTH.

 

[Kawak]

Nevertel is always full of hot air, and even when it comes to pass, will come with a laughable AUP of something like 50GB pm. So in summary, totally forgot about them already.

 

[JStrike]

quoted for truth or quite ****ing true


The noise coming from MTN (and VC appears to be declining to indicate that it is on a different path) is to construct a network that is MTN controlled for MTN subscribers - so no ecosystem for other providers. Neotel and Telkom have both been working on building ecosystems for FTTH.

Very interesting. Will be even more interesting to see which model will work best. I suspect the MTN model (Similar to Verizon, Comcast and AT&T in the USA)

 

[Paul Hjul]

The "cable model" is not good ...*
AT&T doesn't use the cable model - so they should only be on the periphery of your similar list - because the bulk of their assets are telecommunications rather than broadcast network assets
because of the structure and nature of the ECA I don't believe that it will be viable for an ECN to be developed on the cable model and ICASA - unlike the FCC - have the power through market reviews to impose forms of net neutrality.

* except when it is

 

[JStrike]

The "cable model" is not good ...*
AT&T doesn't use the cable model - so they should only be on the periphery of your similar list - because the bulk of their assets are telecommunications rather than broadcast network assets
because of the structure and nature of the ECA I don't believe that it will be viable for an ECN to be developed on the cable model and ICASA - unlike the FCC - have the power through market reviews to impose forms of net neutrality.

* except when it is

Isn't AT&T U-Verse the same cable model as Verizon and Comcast?

 

[FNfal]

FTTH is not going to happen for the foreseeable future for the majority of people .
Taking FTTH is the same as building a new network similar to Telkoms last mile not going to happen .
All is not lost though 90 meg has been field trialed on the MSANs with out bonding , with bonding 400 meg is possible .

 

[ThinkCentre]

Just give it time! I can see that ADSL will disappear and we be using VDSL or FTTH. Remember that Telkom has a advantage now but that will change.

 

[cozinsky]

"However, the company said that its focus remains on the enterprise space." Neotel never really cared about the individual consumer. Pass.

 

[The_Unbeliever]

Neofail.

Their business model will come back to haunt them, when they need it the least.

 

[Paul Hjul]

The U-Verse and FiOS (Verizon) product offering is very much what I think MTN is wanting to do - I actually see now I misread your post and inferred that you'd taken it as a "cable model" but actually the term only appears in my post - which is quite different - Comcast is cable. More importantly AT&T fiber installations are available on a facilities leased basis to other ISPs and the local loop is fully unbundled, in contrast to Cable provided internet - which is why AT&T want to kill net neutrality in its entirety.

But no even without the regulatory considerations the U-Verse model will not work out the best in the medium term. It has major advantages for short run and to acquire critical mass etc ... but the economics of it all is clear trying to build infrastructure to run a monopoly of service does not work -- if it did we would have more railway lines than tarred roads and telecos would rule the Internet.

 

[The_Unbeliever]

The U-Verse and FiOS (Verizon) product offering is very much what I think MTN is wanting to do - I actually see now I misread your post and inferred that you'd taken it as a "cable model" but actually the term only appears in my post - which is quite different - Comcast is cable. More importantly AT&T fiber installations are available on a facilities leased basis to other ISPs and the local loop is fully unbundled, in contrast to Cable provided internet - which is why AT&T want to kill net neutrality in its entirety.

But no even without the regulatory considerations the U-Verse model will not work out the best in the medium term. It has major advantages for short run and to acquire critical mass etc ... but the economics of it all is clear trying to build infrastructure to run a monopoly of service does not work -- if it did we would have more railway lines than tarred roads and telecos would rule the Internet.

Tell that to the big boys in their ivory towers - they'll ignore you, and insists on locking their network down so only their customers will use what they prescribe (or think the customer must use)...