Undersea cables, available bandwidth

[Sneeky]

Hi
Can someone perhaps point me in the right direction here please.

With the new cables landing on our shores, what is the total available bandwidth at present and what is due to come online in the future (next year or 2)?

Also is there a definitive number on actual current demand versus available supply?

Thx

 

[dominic]

not sure that this information exists in collated form...

http://manypossibilities.net/african-undersea-cables/ would be my starting point

 

[Sneeky]

Thx Dominic, that's certainly a good start.

 

[ambo]

Are you wanting design capacity, lit capacity or utilised capacity? Each are at different levels for each cable and apart from the first one...are often not publicly released information.

 

[Sneeky]

Hi ambo

Well design capacity is something I expect will look at the cables and the future upgrades till the end of their life span.

As with WACS, its launch capacity is punted at 500Gbit/s with a potential of offering countries along the route 5.1Tbit/s.
By comparison SAT-3 is at 340Gbit/s and SAFE at 440Gbit/s following upgrades in 2009/2010 which tripled their capacity.

Seacom last year had a 1.28Tbit/s capacity and they announced upgrades citing demand as the driver and being 60% subscribed at that point, upgrade to take place over 12-15 months.

From Word Wide Worx, Arthur Goldstruck
"''The study shows that undersea cable capacity to South Africa at the end of 2011 was 2.69 terabits per second, and due to rise to 11.9Tbps by the end of 2012."

''That capacity will double again in 2013," he added.

Now WACS will have a massive boost on bandwitdh availability.

Internet user growth year on year seems to be around 25% according to another study (Internet Access in SA 2012).

There just seems to be this overflow of bandwidth into the country which is going to continue unabated for the next few years, yet not much else happening.
Yes there are now uncapped options, prices have come down steadily, yet at a snails pace.

I am trying to see/understand whats available versus what is consumed.
We know Telkom is the holy cow enjoying the protection of the state, but surely more can be done to open this up and let local internet usage and business flourish.
Maybe Im just ranting

 

[ambo]

There just seems to be this overflow of bandwidth into the country which is going to continue unabated for the next few years, yet not much else happening.
Yes there are now uncapped options, prices have come down steadily, yet at a snails pace.

I've seen comments like this a number of times and I'm not sure how much of this is real and how much is just perception. Has anyone pulled out an Internet bill from 5 or 10 years ago and compared it to what we are getting now?

I am trying to see/understand whats available versus what is consumed.
We know Telkom is the holy cow enjoying the protection of the state, but surely more can be done to open this up and let local internet usage and business flourish.

This is a fallacy. Telkom does not have any protection. There are over 500 ECNS licences that have been issued and they all have the same (and sometimes more lenient) requirements as Telkom's license.

The cost of international bandwidth no longer contributes the lion's share of the cost of Internet in ZA. Depending on discounts and volumes - international bandwidth contributes between about 40% and 15% of the total cost of an Internet service. The real problem now is the access networks - the bit that connects the customer to the network.

The real problem is not that there is insufficient competition. The problem is that there is now too much competition. Building an access network is an expensive business and none of the 500+ license holders actually have the guts to go build one because they're worried they won't make a profit. And thus it easier to just blame Telkom instead of doing something about it.

 

[Sneeky]

Thanks for the comments and insight ambo.

I could not get adsl 5-10 years ago and I still can't get it where I live now.
Perhaps a more meaningful comparison would be a comparison between 2009 and now as the ball really started rolling on the cable side then.

The real problem now is the access networks - the bit that connects the customer to the network.

The real problem is not that there is insufficient competition. The problem is that there is now too much competition. Building an access network is an expensive business and none of the 500+ license holders actually have the guts to go build one because they're worried they won't make a profit. And thus it easier to just blame Telkom instead of doing something about it.

Excuse my ignorance, I am plodding through this trying to make sense of everything as best I can, but does this not bring us right back to LLU and why it has not happened yet?

 

[MickeyD]

Excuse my ignorance, I am plodding through this trying to make sense of everything as best I can, but does this not bring us right back to LLU and why it has not happened yet?

Any of the 500-odd licence holders can build their own networks, right to your house, and provide you with a service using their own network. What ambo is saying is that they know it is not profitable hence they won't build their own networks and they will continue to blame Telkom. They don't have to wait for LLU.

 

[Sneeky]

I get that MickeyD.
The point is that ICASA and the DoC have been dithering on LLU.
This has been going on for a number of years now.
In 2007 they stated by Nov2011 it would be a done deal. This has come and gone.
Now there is another more moderate plan being fronted by them.

Consider being one of these license holders.
The mixed messages and pure confusion that seems to be coming from the 'policy makers' would certainly make anyone think twice or thrice about investing in their own access network don't you think?

 

[MickeyD]

I get that MickeyD.
The point is that ICASA and the DoC have been dithering on LLU.
This has been going on for a number of years now.
In 2007 they stated by Nov2011 it would be a done deal. This has come and gone.
Now there is another more moderate plan being fronted by them.

Consider being one of these license holders.
The mixed messages and pure confusion that seems to be coming from the 'policy makers' would certainly make anyone think twice or thrice about investing in their own access network don't you think?

If I thought I could make money in an area by deploying my own (fixed line) network, I would have done so a long time ago. A few companies have done so and are providing FTTH in very selected areas. They have not posted their financials so we cannot see if it has been profitable for them to do so.

On LLU; many folks are thinking that the other licencees will get free access to Telkom's network and this will cause retail prices to drop significantly and immediately. They are in a for a surprise. Yes, the prices will drop but only as market forces kick in (and not immediately).

 

[Sneeky]

Considering the vastness of our country is LLU not the only sensible way to go.
Agree on the access bit, it will certainly cost, but cost less in the medium term.

Policy needs to be clear and driven through with intent!
I see MyBB has been invited to offer views/opinion to the DoC on broadband policy making.

That's great, but what good is policy is you dont implement it, do we currently have a broadband policy even?