If you take a look at the powerpoint presentation in the PTC ‘09 Policy panel posting, Laurie Sherman outlines how Asian govts. have taken policies to foster competition and bring about innovations such as bundled services.

Competition is supposed to drive pricing to affordable levels, but in FIJI you have carriers competing against private interests – not that this is a bad thing, but when these very carriers are the wholesalers of access, and the competitor at the same time, you can expect things not to be very fair (lets be real about it)

What Fiji needs is a second international gateway operator because it is the cost of access to wholesale capacity that underpins the costing models used by the retail service providers. Remember they are not in it for charity, but to make a profit and if bandwidth is costly—-the end result for the consumer will be costly as well.

Now look at the flipside. Some of the providers in FIJI have very affordable infrastructure which with a bit of restructure can deliver world-class services. Some have opted to go for very expensive carrier-grade infrastructures which just do not fit the socio-economic demographic for FIJI- resulting in high cost of entry for the service, and a high average recurring which a lot of people just CANNOT afford.
Take into account the sting on the global economy at present and that means a considerable slowing internet penetration for FIJI.

Want penetration into FIJI which doesnt rely on the local infrastructure or wholesale international capacity – the only solution would be SATELLITE based internet to the premise
deliver internet, voip telephony for lower cost international communications, and bundle that with a fair flavor of digital satellite televisiona and audio and people will flock to it
It would be like SKY on steroids…..really.,

Now thats what I would call the FLYING FIJIAN

I think the government needs to start taking a more pro-active role in proliferation of an internet culture in FIJI. Thats not to say every joe and his bro needs to OWN a PC and have internet. The government needs to look at things like baselining the availability and access to INTERNET for its people
if ISPs in FIJI want to save costs they need to start looking at local internet exchanges and technological means of keeping local traffic local.

I mean we can talk for eons – but consider this. Right now if I am on any of the local ISPs and you are on another local ISP – I send you an email, it has to traverse the globe before you get it – thats a waste of resources (like international bandwidth)
Small steps first then the bigger issues.

Yes, this blog was started with the intention of helping move Fiji to universal and ubiquitous internet coverage.

You are also right that none of the local players could carry this out. Someone like Digicel is in the right position to make it happen for Fiji, because without a new international pipeline, we’re not going anywhere.

Just this morning, a large IT consulting firm announced they are setting up their regional headquarters in American Samoa, because of lower operating costs (resulting from the new ASH cable.

Isn’t the pricing of the internet in Fiji as a ‘walled garden’ affecting the low penetration rates of internet user-ship?

What do you think of the latest post on netbooks being given away by wireless internet service providers?

Heck we could even call it coconut wireless ey?

Prediction- Unwired isnt gonna make the difference nor is Fintel, so dont bank on that

From the sounds of Freemans comments he didnt have WiMAX, but pre-wimax because WiMAX equipment in and of itself was never designed for indoor deployment. That said it should be noted that for the most part WiMAX deployments would require much more tower infrastructure than would cellular.
Lets keep a few aspects of physics in mind. The higher the frequency – the less distance it will travel and the less penetration power it will have.

Most WiMAX deployments in Fiji have centered on the 3.2-3.6ghz range – which means they will have issue with NLOS, and with penetration. Manufacturer claims may be 15km range but with the topographic makeup in FIJI you can expect that to be more around 4-8km at best (for any decent level of performance). So it will be an expensive undertaking which may hinder its rapid deployment (I think you can see this alreayd with the two WiMAX ready providers that have launched services)

If one is looking to decrease cost of internet in FIJI then one should look at improving on internet penetration in country – and moves towards making internet more commonplace of a utility just like FEA, Water and even Telephone Service.
you have a popoulous of close to 1million and about 25000 is internet enabled—–thats why the cost is high.

WiMAX certainly does have limitations, all wireless communications protocols have issues.

It is important to note that WiMAX remains a draft proposal and in this ‘incomplete’ state there will definitely be issues and challenges. Expect these to become less of a problem once a final technical standard has been approved.

As for poor Garth-O Down Under, D nails it on the head. Most likely his issues have to do with the equipment he is using and how he has chosen to deploy his network.

Should not shake anyone’s belief in WiMAX or any other future technology that will keep internet traffic off of expensive mobile networks. This remains the best alternative to provide low-cost access to those who cannot afford it.

20/03/2008 09:37:00 – by Martyn Warwick & Commsday

One of the world’s first WiMAX operators, Hervey Bay, of Australia’s
Buzz Broadband, has closed the network, with the CEO labeling the
technology as a “disaster” that has “failed miserably.”

In an astonishing outburst before the audience at an international
WiMAX conference audience in Bangkok, Thailand, CEO Garth Freeman
slammed the technology, saying its non-line of sight performance
was “non-existent” beyond two kilometres from the base station, that
indoor performance decayed at a mere 400 metres and that latency
rates reached as high as 1000 milliseconds.

Mr. Freeman said poor latency and jitter made the technology
unsuitable and unacceptable for many Internet applications in general
and for VoIP in particular. Buzz used to extol the virtues of VoIP,
hyping it as a main selling point as it sought to persuade people to
sign-up for the new service and dump old ones supplied by the
incumbent .

Garth Freeman told delegates, “WiMAX may not work,” adding that the
technology remains “mired in opportunistic hype.” The CEO also
emphasised that most WiMAX deployments are still in the trials stage
and that the technology is attractive to and used by used by “start-
up carriers” and is only supported by “second-tier vendors”.

He then contrasted WiMAX with HSPA and pointed out that there are
already 154 commercial networks in operation and that the technology
has the full backing of top tier vendors.

What made Freeman’s tirade all the more extraordinary was that just
12 months ago he fronted the same event and gave an upbeat and
overwhelmingly positive appraisal of the platform – a platform that
he had deployed just a few months before.

At the time, Garth Freeman said his company had signed 10 per cent of
its 55,000 user target market in just two months, a market share that
quickly rose to 25 per cent on the back of an advertising campaign
that highlighted cheap VoIP prices.

But back then, Mr.

Freeman also acknowledge dthat WiMAX technology has indoor coverage
issues. Indeed, at this week’s Bangkok meeting, the CEO revealed that
his frankness last year had resulted in a sharp reprimand from his
supplier, Airspan. The company was unhappy that its equipment had
been implicitly criticised.

Elsewhere, other early WiMAX adopters have also reported issues with
indoor coverage. Late last year VSNL of India said at an IEEE
conference that indoor signal loss occurs just 200 metres from a base
station.

Garth Freeman says Buzz has now abandoned WiMAX and will pursue a
a “horses for courses” policy. This includes use of the TD-CDMA
standard at 1.9GHz – used by operators such as New Zealand’s Woosh
Wireless – and a platform he describes as wireless DOCSIS. This a
relatively little-known technology that takes HFC plant and extends
its capabilities via wireless mesh.

Mr. Freeman says wireless DOCSIS operates at up to 38Mbps in the
3.5GHz spectrum and its customer premises equipment supports two
voice ports for under $A70 while it boasts “huge cell coverage.” He
added that he will also deploy more conventional wireless mesh
platforms at 2.4GHz that support up to 10Mbps with CPE voice ports
costing less than A$80.

Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail