Readers' Comments

Reader Comments on Aardvark Daily 8 November 2002
Note: the comments below are the unabridged submissions of readers and do
not necessarily reflect the opinions of the publisher.
From: Mark Ross
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Telecom/Rural Customers

I find something very funny about this whole, "rural
customers are going to have to pay more for installs" thing.

Currently, Telecom is spreading the cost of those installs
across it's entire user base.  In effect, that means that I
(as a city dweller) am paying more than I should for my
phone, because my money is being used to subsidize
these "less profitable" customers.

However, it should be noted, that even if Telecom holds
it's line, and increases costs for these poor rural folk,
you can be damn sure Telecom will not be lowering the bills
of those in city centres.  Which they rightfully should, if
everyone is now going to be paying their share.

This is just another one of many obvious cash-grabs by
Telecom to increase profits for pay-outs to the
shareholders (but, above all, increase pay-outs to the TCNZ
executive team).





From: Arthur H Hiscock
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Telecom level of service

I agree if you pay top dollar your should have top service,
the problem is who (and what) defines top service. I am not
sure but I doubt that Telecom is under any obligation to
provide more than a voice quality circuit capable of
supporting 19k6 data transfer.
It may be that this level of service has been redefined but
I doubt it. Ergo Telecom have the people by the balls if
they want any more than this.
There are areas of Auckland with extremely high densities
of population who are denied ADSL since the installed lines
where the cheapest option and so Fibre Optic.
I would be intrested in knowing what the minimum service
level telecom have to provide is?




From: Anonymous
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Rural connections..

Just a comment about rural phone lines. I live in Aucklands North Shore, i
am close to an ADSL exchange (less than 1KM). I needed to get a phone line
put in to a new place i was moving in to (it was basically a basement
flat). It didn't have a line of it's own in there, it used to share the
upstairs line. I tried to get a line installed, but it turns out there
were no spare pairs, so telecom (or more accurately the contractors on
behalf of telecom) would have to install a line. I was quoted a price of
$1200 to $1500 estimate, they had to thrust under the driveway (thrusting
is xx per metre), and dig a ditch (which telecom says has to be xx amount
deep), then go underneat another piece of concrete, and then through a
wall into the house.

So should i be allowed to pay $61.88 or whatever the price is ?
Last i checked i was smack right in the middle of the North shore, far
from a rural area. Rural people seem to think they should get stuff cheap
or free, i know people who have had to pay heaps to get powerlines put in,
or they just use generators. So telecom is 'Selfish' for wanting people to
pay for the labour involved in installing a phone line ? Hardly. You could
then say every single person who wants to make money is 'selfish'

Perhaps the
government should subsidise, or install themselves 'rural
networks'.

I think it's a cop-out when rural dwellers rant and rave
about stuff like this, it's EXACTLY the same if you aren't rural, yet you
don't see newspaper stories about that do you ?

Perhaps rural people
should stop and think that the price they pay for living in such clean
open air, with hardly any noise from traffic, people, etc. Is that they
have to make a few sacrifices, and stop whingeing about how they don't
have a $100,000 adsl DSLAM for their own personal use. (ADSL isn't that
great from telecom anyway, it's way overpriced)




From: Sarah Nelson
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Telecom profiteering

We recently decided to move a little further out of
Christchurch central city and to a lifestyle block.  Unlike
most lifestyle blocks, this 5 acre section is already
established and only 7 minutes drive (at a legal speed)
from Church Corner Shopping Centre, Riccarton.  For those
from Christchurch,  it’s about 3 kms past the Yaldhurst
pub – hardly “rural” by West Coast standards.

During late October we called Telecom and asked for a
technician to visit and let us know if there would be any
difficulties installing a second line into the property and
the cost.  He visited and confirmed 2-pair wiring overhead
leading into the house and it would be a simple job to
split the wires inside and add another jack point,  total
cost around $50.  No worries we thought and went ahead with
the house purchase.

Early November, I called Telecom to arrange (1) phone
transfer of our existing first line and (2) a second line
installed.

“I’m sorry sir”, said the actually very helpful lady I
dealt with,  “The cost of the new installation will be
$1500+GST – the zone is newly classified as ‘low-density’
and the new charges came into effect this week.”

Once I stopped shaking, I explained that no trenches needed
to be dug, no lines installed and the technician had quoted
me already that it was a 30 minutes, $50 job.

She checked with 3 supervisors and came back with… “I’m
sorry sir, this is classified (entered on the computer) as
a quote ‘new installation’ end quote, and no matter what
work needs to be carried out, the new low-density charges
will apply.”

Luckily after further investigation, the technician who
visited in October had not “closed the original job” so I
was able to get the second line installed at only $50
anyway…

I felt lucky – but after reading the news reports about
Telecom insisting these price hikes are for rural West
Coast farms in the middle of nowhere and covers trench
digging for miles etc etc, I feel that I must speak up as
obviously they are misleading the public in many areas.

I have since lodged a call with the Commerce Commission.
Hit Reload For Latest Comments
Now Have Your Say