NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] No fiber please, we're British
----- Forwarded message from Dave Farber <dave@farber.net> ----- Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 09:57:35 -0500 From: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net> Subject: [IP] No fiber please, we're British Reply-To: dave@farber.net To: ip <ip@v2.listbox.com> Begin forwarded message: > From: "D.H. van der Woude" <dhvanderwoude@gmail.com> > Date: November 28, 2009 8:34:11 AM EST > To: dave@farber.net > Subject: No fiber please, we 're British > > > Fave, for IP if you wish. > > > This post by Herman Wagter may be of interest to some > > > http://www.dadamotive.com/2009/11/no-fiber-please.html > > No fiber please > > Posted by Herman | November 26 | 2009 6:37 PM | > > A seemingly unrelated and innocuous taxation may explain a part of the > (lack of) broadband development in the UK, especially outside the bigger > cities. > > Lit fibers are subject to a property tax (unlike copper wires used for > telephony or DSL). > The VOA (Valuation Office) sets the rateable value. > > You can expect to pay for backhaul or corporate networks > £0.28 per metre per fibre per annum for 2 fibers, > £0.17 per metre per fibre per annum for 4 fibers, > The rate scheme drops quickly with the number of fibers in a route to > £0.05 per metre per fibre per annum for 40 fibers. > > £7.50 per home passed per annum for fibre access networks (to be fin > alized). > > " As NGA will be mainly the replacement of existing copper > infrastructure, the VO considers that the level of value for > residential NGA connections will be similar to the £7.50 per home pa > ssed adopted for cable TV access networks, the nearest comparable ne > twork currently offering broadband services". > > The rating scheme penalizes small operators and companies that start > their business: their average cost is much, much higher than large > existing corporations with a lot of fibers and long lengths. The ones > with a lot of fiber can add fiber with low marginal costs of taxation, > new entrants have a hard time. > > What about smaller villages? > Lets assume a minimum of 2 fibers in a redundant ring to a village with > 1000 homes where 50 % of the people are dying for broadband access, > approx 30 km away from the nearest backhaul aggregation point. > The tax rate is £0.28 per metre per fibre per annum for backhaul of 2 > fiber, 60.000 meters (redundant ring) and 2 fibers lead to a tax bill of > £ 33.600 per year, or £ 67.2 per connected user (50 % penetration). > Auch. > > No wonder you are on your own if you live somewhere a bit off the > centre of a city. The business case get harder en harder just because of > taxation designed in 2000. The backhaul networks are probably minimized > in number of fibers and capacity, shared as much as possible to reduce > the costs, leading to high overbookingsratios and lacklustre response > times of websites. Could that again be a reason why broadband adoption > outside the cities is relatively low? > It is hard to get a causal relationship proven, but one starts to > wonder.... > ------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ----- End forwarded message -----