• Great articles on other sites
  • RSS Great articles on other sites

  • Featured, News - Written by on Thursday, February 10, 2011 11:26 - 77 Comments

    Conroy eviscerates Economist’s “right-wing dogma”

    Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has delivered a contemptuous riposte to the research arm of global financial magazine The Economist, describing a report produced by the organisation analysing Labor’s flagship National Broadband Network project as “right-wing dogma”.

    The report published yesterday described the NBN project as costing the Australian taxpayer 24 times as much as a similar project in South Korea, and delivering one tenth the speed. The Economist also took the Federal Government to task for spending money from the public purse on the project instead of utilising private sector efforts.

    Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull immediately welcomed the report yesterday. “Now the Economist Intelligence Unit joins the long list of expert observers, both international and local, who are utterly dismayed by the reckless spending of the Gillard Government on the NBN,” he said. “The study confirms, yet again, that this NBN project should be the subject of a rigorous cost benefit analysis by the Productivity Commission.”

    However, in a media conference in Canberra today, Conroy ridiculed the research, pointing out that the opening paragraph of an Economist media statement on the report was “factually wrong”, in that Australia’s NBN would support 1Gbps — not the 100Mbps the report claimed it would. The upgraded speeds were announced during the 2010 election campaign.

    “Unfortunately their research failed to notice that in actual fact we’re delivering a gigabyte — the same as Korea,” the Minister said. “It’s factually wrong in its opening statement and it goes down from there.”

    Conroy said the report gave countries “zero marks for public investments” in national broadband networks, but “ten out of ten” for private investment. This, he said, was “ideological dogma — right-wing dogma”, as it showed The Economist was opposed to government investment in infrastructure.

    The Labor stalwart said the Government was investing in the telecommunications sector in Australia because it had suffered 12 years of “market failure” under the previous Howard Government. “Any economic textbook you read from first year onwards will tell you that there is market failure,” Conroy — who has a degree in economics — said.

    In addition, he said the only NBN deal which had been offered by the private sector to the Government was the offer by previous Telstra chief executive Sol Trujillo to build a fibre to the node network. “They offered John Howard a deal. They offered that deal to me as well,” he said, noting the arrangement hadn’t proved suitable. “The Howard Government rejected Telstra’s kind offer, we rejected Telstra’s kind offer, and nobody else is offering.”

    Other aspects of the report were also flawed, Conroy said — such as the differences in size, population and density between countries like Australia and South Korea — and the fact that South Korea had already built a national fibre to the node (basement) network and was now upgrading it to fibre to the home.

    Holding up a piece of paper which he said constituted the entirety of the analysis in the report, Conroy said he hoped the media hadn’t paid the $3,000 the report costs to buy in full. “For those who haven’t spent the $3,000, I just wanted you to see the entire analysis in this document,” Conroy said. “I hope not too many of you spent the $3,000.”

    Image credit: Kim Davies, Creative Commons

    submit to reddit


    You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

    1. Posted 10/02/2011 at 11:33 am | Permalink | Reply

      “Unfortunately their research failed to notice that in actual fact we’re delivering a gigabyte”

      Is that an accruate quote Renai? I unfortunately didn’t see it. Shouldn’t it be gigabit. :P

      • Posted 10/02/2011 at 11:40 am | Permalink | Reply

        That’s what I typed in my notes about what he said. I know it sounds strange, but it wouldn’t be abnormal for Conroy to say gigabyte instead of gigabit.

        • Posted 10/02/2011 at 11:59 am | Permalink | Reply

          Yeah I’ve heard him say early on in the piece that people would have 25 megabyte downloads. He really has no clue. It’s just lucky that the mate he picked to run NBNco seems to know what he’s doing, or at least he’s asking the right people and listening to them.

          • Posted 10/02/2011 at 12:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

            Well he might be accruate about that, they do offer 200Mbps, which will download at about 25MB/s. ;)

            • Posted 10/02/2011 at 12:04 pm | Permalink | Reply


              • Jay
                Posted 10/02/2011 at 2:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

                No, not 250Mbps. 200Mbps. There are only 8 bits in a byte last time I counted.

                • Posted 10/02/2011 at 2:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

                  Yes, that is correct, but a) they don’t offer a 200Mbps wholesale option and b) there is considerbale overheads. It’d be closer to 210Mbps to achieve 25MB/s, but that’s not important, it was more of a dig at Conroy.

                • Goresh
                  Posted 26/05/2012 at 12:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

                  Your aren’t allowing for supervisory overhead, but 200mb/s will deliver slightly better than 25MB/s

        • PeterA
          Posted 10/02/2011 at 4:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

          I heard him this morning, he said gigabyte.
          *shrug*. I still dont get why conroy of all people can’t get it right.

          Though; as long as I get at-least a gigabit per second. I won’t be complaining for a second if they supply me with a gigabyte per second 8 times faster than promised!

          • Posted 10/02/2011 at 4:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

            A gigabyte per second … muhahahahah. The thought of what I could do with that. Phenomenal!

            • Snow Crash
              Posted 10/02/2011 at 7:29 pm | Permalink | Reply


              You would end up wearing a neckbrace, wouldn’t you – from the whiplash!!!!!!!!

    2. Posted 10/02/2011 at 11:57 am | Permalink | Reply

      Wouldn’t it be funny if he gave out copies of the $3000 report to everyone at the press conference and then his mates at AFACT would want to lock him up for copyright infringement.

      One can hope, can’t they.

      From what I’ve seen reported, the ‘Report’ is a load of rubbish. You can’t compare a country the size of Korea(The same size as Tasmania) with a country the size of Australia. There are far greater distances to cover and the population density is far less here.

      If Australia had the same population density as Korea, I dare say we wouldn’t need the NBN because it would have been financially viable for Telstra or Optus to do it.

      • Posted 10/02/2011 at 2:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

        I agree, the Economist report was a piece of crap … they didn’t pay even the slightest amount of attention to what Australia is actually doing here.

        • PeterA
          Posted 10/02/2011 at 4:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

          Additionally, isn’t it a bit rich to claim that South Korea’s FTTN network is cheaper than Australias, given that the South Korean government has invested something like 70 billion dollars into their network in the past?

          Biggest problem I’m having right now is sourcing where that 70 billion dollar figure I have found came from.

          Trying to find Fibre to the Node articles about anything other than Australia is impossible…

          • PeterA
            Posted 10/02/2011 at 4:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

            ugh, first FTTN should be a FTTP. Sorry folks

        • deteego
          Posted 10/02/2011 at 6:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

          For starters, as stated by Conroy

          “90% of Australia’s population occupies 2% of its land area.”

          In fact, that was his justification that the NBN (vs asian countries) that the NBN wasn’t too expensive. Now he is indirectly using it as justification that the NBN is too expensive

          The report showed one thing, and it showed it well, it displayed the enormous and gargantuan amount of money being spent on the internet

          And Conroy’s attitude of “everyone is wrong but me” is going to bight him back in the behind, stuff like this is only making the coalitions argument even stronger, and the Labors argument that much weaker

    3. greg
      Posted 10/02/2011 at 12:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Although not infallible, The Economist has credibility based on a track record. Conroy hasn’t.

      • Posted 10/02/2011 at 12:24 pm | Permalink | Reply

        Doesn’t refute Conroy’s Cristisms through, particularly about the network delievering 1Gbps.

        It just means you should take what Conroy says with a grain of salt… but I thought everyone already did that?

      • Posted 10/02/2011 at 1:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

        The Economist is also very right-wing.

        It’s not often I watch a presser from Conroy, and don’t feel dirty, but despite his usual vocabulary and public speaking fails, he actually did okay today.

        • Posted 10/02/2011 at 1:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

          But don’t you feel dirty having to agree with him. I know I do. :)

          • Posted 10/02/2011 at 3:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

            I feel…oh, I don’t know how I feel!

            It’s not – “oh, I just had a prostate exam” – dirty, but I certainly feel an imbalance in the force.

            • Posted 10/02/2011 at 3:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

              Well, with my recent pro-NBN proclivities, maybe we’ll find ourselves being bosom buddies with Conroy before we know it!

        • Posted 10/02/2011 at 2:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

          Yup — I think he knows now that the Government has addressed all of the arguments about the NBN and now just needs to get on with the job — he senses instinctively that the days of being on shaky ground are now behind the project, and it’s on for real — and he has mandate. He did a great job this morning.

      • Charles M
        Posted 10/02/2011 at 3:16 pm | Permalink | Reply

        Actually, The Economist has never been all that accurate…but they are excellent at getting the pulse of the right-wing to a tee.

        • Posted 10/02/2011 at 3:24 pm | Permalink | Reply

          i actually find the magazine quite good and enjoy the read when I’m overseas — but I don’t know much about their research unit. I wouldn’t say they’re overly “right-wing” — more “mainstream capitalist” … which is not the same thing at all these days.

      • Francis
        Posted 10/02/2011 at 6:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

        @greg, the Economist certainly does have a track record of credibility. It sure did a great job predicting the global financial crisis – NOT!

        Anyway, its methodology in this case was to get both the technical description and funding sources completely wrong (suspiciously consistent with the theory that they were supplied by Malcolm Turnbull, who knew about the report before everyone else), and to use as its key criterion the profitability of the project to big business.

        Because the NBN constitutes a permanent antidote to the social inequity and price gouging of sixteen years of market failure, and deliberately designed to return bond rates of return only, it was bound to be marked down by the Economist Intelligence Unit.

        I wonder who actually commissioned the report? My bet is on either big telecoms or big banks. Someone must know.

    4. Snow Crash
      Posted 10/02/2011 at 5:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The 1 Gbps “clarification” was actually announced by Julia Gillard August last year. There was plenty of publicity at the time, even ABC’s Kerry O’Brien interrogated Tony Abbott – in particular his policy – unrealistic and misleading claims for the capabilities of HFC and wireless technologies.

      This makes me wonder where these journalists live. Yet another case of false and misleading behavour and those poor suckers that paid $3000 for their crap. I hope they all ask for their money back.

      Over at Yahoo there is a poll going right now. Do you still support the government’s NBN plan?
      6843 votes – Yes 24% – No 21% – I never have 55%

      Watching people stuff up their ICT related measurement units always amuses me. Comparing South Korea and Australia is simply infantile. I am sure cost of the cable is per meter.

      The business opportunity I am currently looking at in the US is starting looking more and more attractive as there is the threat and a risk of another 12 years in a vacuum.

      • Posted 10/02/2011 at 5:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

        $3,000 for a report of this nature is ridiculous; but then again, I bet each govt mentioned paid it.

        • Snow Crash
          Posted 10/02/2011 at 5:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

          I wonder who has to pay for that.

        • Snow Crash
          Posted 10/02/2011 at 6:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

          The NBN Business Plan requested by the Coallition is of equal value. Next to useless except to justify the n of the NBN project. For my own business & marketing plan the report as a result of the Parlimentary inquiry was sufficient.

          We will never get politicians and their journalist side-kicks to understand the economics and of ITC industries and innovation. The NBN business plan wouldn’t be able to forecast private sector development and venture capital in ICT startups etc. Evidently have not been very good at it in the past 12 years!

          Hell! Maybe an Australian developer might invent the next Facebook or Google, not that we need another one of either. We have emerging technologies to deal with. http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1447613

          In the US, on the other hand, the Obama Administration is injecting a ton of economic stimulus into Silicon Valley and told all to get cracking and innovate and combination with their US$350 million National Broadband Plan.

          • Snow Crash
            Posted 10/02/2011 at 7:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

            US$350 billion National Broadband Plan.

      • cc
        Posted 10/02/2011 at 6:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

        “This makes me wonder where these journalists live.”

        Not in Australia, that’s for sure, this is what the EIU website says:

        “Our team includes over 120 full-time country specialists, economists and business analysts, based in London, New York, Singapore, Shanghai, Beijing, Tokyo and Hong Kong.”

        Australia is not on the list.

        • Snow Crash
          Posted 10/02/2011 at 6:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

          Actually, I was thinking of Under A Rock.

        • Posted 10/02/2011 at 8:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

          Big, fat surprise, that one ;)

    5. Snow Crash
      Posted 10/02/2011 at 5:55 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Simulataneously, Telstra announced a 36% drop in profit.

      • Francis
        Posted 10/02/2011 at 6:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

        Yes, Snow Crash, but read the detail. They had to complete some expensive system rejigs started by Sol, and to reorganise for their future revenue streams from broadband services. Yesterday they launched unmetered Foxtel over broadband for their 200,000+ TBox customers, which will only work for half of them when the fibre arrives since their ADSL is too slow.

        I repeat my prediction of last year that Telstra shares will hit $5.00 this year after shareholders approve the NBN deal.

        • Snow Crash
          Posted 10/02/2011 at 7:01 pm | Permalink | Reply

          I am reading a massive drop in sales.

          • Snow Crash
            Posted 10/02/2011 at 7:24 pm | Permalink | Reply

            …and its for the half year ending December 2010.

          • Posted 11/02/2011 at 8:20 am | Permalink | Reply

            That also depends how you read it.

            Customer numbers are up, but revenue per customer is down.

      • Snow Crash
        Posted 10/02/2011 at 7:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

        In any case, nothing is going to be done until Telstra shareholders approve the decoupling of wholesale & retail structure. The NBN Project can still easily be ambushed. Share price has not budged.

        • Francis
          Posted 10/02/2011 at 8:12 pm | Permalink | Reply

          Telstra’s share price plumetted to $2.56 mid-November when the coalition looked like sinking the enabling legislation. At the time I predicted that it would double within a year if the deal went ahead.

          It has risen from $2.77 to $2.88 this month (touching $2.91 today), and the late news of the agreed technical details might have an impact tomorrow, but I do agree it can still be derailed with misinformation.

          So without a deal even signed, we have already seen a 14% share price rise in three months as awareness has grown of the golden future for a retail-only Telstra of services over the NBN, plus its own revenue from leasing facilities to NBNCo, and cost savings on infrastructure maintenance and universal service obligations.

          • RS
            Posted 10/02/2011 at 11:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

            Hi Francis, I enjoy reading your comments and I too have been telling the usual TLS suspects for over a year (who cling to NWAT) to get onboard the NBN, but…

            Here’s a run down of todays results

            Sales revenue declined 0.5% or $60m to $12,263m
            EBITDA declined 13.9% or $737m to $4,580m
            EBITDA margins declined by 5.8 percentage points to 37.3%
            EBIT declined by 24.1% or $756m to $2,376m
            Earnings per share of 9.6 cents was down 35.6%
            Free cashflow declined 22.9% or $599m to $2,020m

            Results on guidance:
            Sales revenue declined 0.5% or $60m to $12,263m
            EBITDA declined by 12.5% or $663m to $4,654m
            Free cashflow declined 35% or $919m to $1,700m

            Financials declined and down…and this will continue without the NBN vote being successful, imo.

            So what do we now see…?

            Comments being posted on comms blogs with a link to a website… Help TLS Shareholders Stop The NBN… LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            And what do they ask – “how dumb do they think we shareholders at Telstra are”?

            A. Well, you bought TLS, nuff said!

            • Francis
              Posted 11/02/2011 at 1:42 am | Permalink | Reply

              RS, Telstra acquired huge numbers of new customers in late 2010 with better offers.

              Customer acquisition is expensive (sales staff, technical setup, bundled hardware to be cost-recovered over 2 years), but it pays off in the back half of a 24 month contract and beyond if they don’t churn.

              Every customer on Telstra’s books when the NBN rolls by will probably remain a Bigpond customer, but on NBN infrastructure instead of Telstra copper. These new customers are gold, so it was money well spent this year.

              They also spent a lot repositioning themselves for a retail services future, such as the 200,000+ TBox customers who can now buy (Telstra-half-owned) Foxtel over broadband, which will only work properly as bandwidth improves (ADSL having an average speed of 2.8 Mbps in Australia according to the ABS).

              As for the shares, Telstra 2 was over-rated, but Telstra 3 was lunacy, and I advocated strongly at the time against selling off the publicly owned copper network. But having bought a chunk of Telstra 1 I did pretty well, and eventually sold just in time at about $8.50 when it started its decline.

              Now is absolutely the time to buy Telstra again under $3, but I just haven’t got any cash sloshing around as I am now blessed with a beautiful young family and a mortgage.

              [Thanks for the comments about my comments. I enjoy many of yours too, but we probably both need to stick to correcting factual errors and not criticise the messenger quite so often. Some posters think Malcolm Turnbull is saying what he really thinks about the NBN, for instance, when he is merely desperate to undermine the only major program Labor is delivering well.]

              • Posted 11/02/2011 at 10:13 am | Permalink | Reply

                “Every customer on Telstra’s books when the NBN rolls by will probably remain a Bigpond customer”

                Not really sure I agree with this. What incentive will there be, when the NBN rolls out, to remain with Telstra, and its woeful billing systems? Apart from bundling offers with 3G mobile broadband?

                • Someone else
                  Posted 11/02/2011 at 10:26 am | Permalink | Reply

                  I can think of a couple off the top of my head:
                  -Like many of my older relatives, most Telstra shareholders (is millions of Australians) would never consider moving away from the Big T, it would be unaustralian! ;) Cue Sydney Lawrence!
                  Unrefutable evidence of Stockholm Syhdrome.

                  -ACCC gives the OK on volume discounts, making Telstra a bunch cheaper than everybody else. YES-I realise that Quigley has said this won’t happen, BUT – as you could tell from the NBN staff squirming in the room at the Sydney NBN forum when questions were asked about increasing the number of POIs, Quigley doesn’t call all the shots.

                  Interesting times ahead.

                • Francis Young
                  Posted 11/02/2011 at 12:15 pm | Permalink | Reply

                  Renai, you’re absolutely right that Telstra needs to maintain it’s current unfamiliar focus on customer service and price!

                  I believe that many Telstra customers (especially older ones with rose-coloured memories of the PMG and Telecom Australia) will simply accept a costless changeover of their Telstra landline and/or web service to Telstra fibre (or for the tiny 7%, to 12 Mbps fixed wireless or satellite).

                  So initially I would expect most not to change providers if the offer they are on is customer-focussed, or offers a cost-effective bundle with broadband television or mobile phones.

                  However, when their first NBN-based contract comes around for renewal more of them will consider their options.

                  • Posted 11/02/2011 at 1:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

                    Wireless and satellite serviced areas will keep their copper and therefore will not have basic voice transferred to the NBN.

    6. Francis
      Posted 10/02/2011 at 7:23 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Are you also reading a massive number of new customers, mostly Vodafone defectors? Startup costs for new customers are hefty (including sales staff time, technical setup and phone/modem hardware to be cost-recovered over 24 months).

      Every Bigpond customer is money in the bank both now, and in future when Telstra migrates them onto NBN fibre. Bother to read the full Telstra media release and you will see spending in order to save in future. Just like the NBN build, actually.

    7. Posted 10/02/2011 at 8:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

      So, if we run a cable over to Korea we can get the speed without all this NBN rubbish.

    8. Dean
      Posted 10/02/2011 at 8:50 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I’m actually in Korea at the moment on holidays. The idea that you can compare Australia and Korea in terms of broadband costs and coverage is totally laughable.

      First of all, even if you assume that 90% of Australia’s population occupies 0.2% of it’s landmass, that’s still around 120 people per square kilometre. That still pales in comparison to Korea’s 440 people per square kilometre.

      Secondly, everybody – and I really do mean everybody – in Korea lives in high-rise apartment buildings. Korea’s initial fibre roll-out was actually only FTTB – Fibre to the Basement. The last 100 metres or so is served by VDSL to the fibre node in your apartment building’s basement. As The Economist noted, Korea are currently undergoing a network upgrade, essentially brining the fibre all the way to the premises. Australia is simply skipping the FTTB step and going FTTH straight away.

      Finally, the report actually notes that the cost of Korea’s network is roughly the same as the cost of Australia’s NBN. The difference is that Korea’s network was largely funded by the private sector, whereas Australia’s is largely funded by the government. The Economist’s real beef is not the actual cost, but just the public/private funding split.

      It’s also interesting to note that Korea’s upgrade from 100Mb/s to 1000Mb/s is being largely funded by the private sector. If you ever needed any evidence that the idea that “100Mb/s is more than anybody would ever need” is not true, then I would say this is it.

      • deteego
        Posted 10/02/2011 at 10:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

        Note that their can be other reasons why the private sector is upgrading from FTTB to FTTP, for example it would save them the cost of powering the VDSL cabinets in the basements, which for apartments can amount to quite a lot of money

        The reason why FTTH is so strong in Japan was for a similar reasons (in this case telcos in Japan had to pay for the power for DSLAMS and whatnot)

        • Dean
          Posted 11/02/2011 at 1:03 am | Permalink | Reply

          I can find no sources which indicate that Japan even HAD a FTTN network that they’re upgrading to FTTH, let alone that they’re doing it because of the cost of running the nodes in the buildings. For example, two sources which claim it’s a simple matter of being able to offer faster speeds:


          I can also only find sources that quote the increased speeds as the reason for Korea’s upgrade:


          • deteego
            Posted 11/02/2011 at 1:42 am | Permalink | Reply

            I wasn’t talking about FTTN (in regards to Japan), I was talking about their ADSL2+ service. In Japan the ISP’s have to pay for the power consumption of the DSLAMS, which equates to a very high cost (for the ISP’s), where as its a different story with FTTH. The similar reason I was referring to was in saving power

            This is the article

            Of course the major reason why high density countries are able to deliver such high targets is because of density reasons its actually commercially viable. There has been little evidence that such speeds being rolled out to residential areas have been for demand reasons

        • Posted 11/02/2011 at 8:24 am | Permalink | Reply

          NBN Co confirmed last week that at this stage, that their current thinking in terms of MDUs is that they will almost certainly run fibre to each and every premise within an MDU, rather than an “FTTB” solution with VDSL (or something else) inside the building.

          It gives each premise (whether it be a single house or a single apartment in a 80-floor apartment complex) the same level of service.

          • deteego
            Posted 11/02/2011 at 10:25 am | Permalink | Reply

            They can definitely enjoy trying to do that, a lot of MDU’s are going to be ‘difficult’ to rewire, and thats putting it nicely

            • Posted 11/02/2011 at 11:27 am | Permalink | Reply

              Maybe you should offer your expertise to help?

              • Posted 11/02/2011 at 11:28 am | Permalink | Reply

                But that would mean he’s endorsing the policy! He can’t do that…

              • deteego
                Posted 11/02/2011 at 5:50 pm | Permalink | Reply

                Last I heard from NBNCo regarding the issues of MDU’s, they were going to only do FTTH in premises where it was feasible to do so, else they would do a FTTB

                Australia, unlike countries like Singapore, Japan and South Korea, has a lot of old style built MDU’s along with high standards when it comes to cable installation. I know that I place I own, they would literally have rip through every room in the MDU (at a minimum) if they were going to do an internal replacement of the copper with the fiber

                Of course they could do an “outer” installation of the FTTH (usually on the outer portions of the building), which means they wouldn’t do an internal installation, however a lot of landlord bodies (including Strata) wouldn’t wan’t that (for obvious reasons).

                Of course they “could” do it, but difficulty equates to cost, and annoying the hell out of the people living in the MDU at the time

      • Snow Crash
        Posted 11/02/2011 at 3:11 am | Permalink | Reply

        I will bet you South Korea’s freeways are jammed with traffic and its hard to find parking. I don’t buy that arguement or the population arguement.

        Next thing these boneheads will be doing is comparing the NBN plan with the National Broadband Plan recommendations in India announced by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India December 2010.

        According to a news report on the tele tonight, this proposal has been given the “green light”.

        • Snow Crash
          Posted 11/02/2011 at 4:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

          Actually, they can compare many National Broadband Plans from around the world. A global and universal strategy with many changes.


      • Posted 11/02/2011 at 10:18 am | Permalink | Reply


    9. RS
      Posted 10/02/2011 at 11:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Comparing the Japanese to us now eh?

      But over at ZD when another poster used California as a comparison in relation to subterranean power, your answer…

      “No an article from America isn’t valid at all because California is completely different from Australia in regards to national disasters, population density and whatnot, and how the energy sector + governments are set up are also completely different”.

      Ah, contradictions… the FUDsters second best friend, behind lies!

      • Snow Crash
        Posted 11/02/2011 at 5:02 pm | Permalink | Reply

        “Ah, contradictions… the FUDsters second best friend, behind lies!”

        Fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) is a tactic used in sales, marketing, public relations, politics and propaganda. FUD is generally a strategic attempt to influence public perception by disseminating negative and dubious/false information designed to undermine the credibility of their beliefs.

        This is very apt description of the situation.

        FUD is a term invented by the ICT Industry back in 1975, when Gene Amdahl left IBM to found his own company, Amdahl Corp. Microsoft are the masters of FUD. The thing is when anyone non-ICT acts this way, it looks blantantly obvious.

        • Posted 11/02/2011 at 5:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

          Yeah, I think FUD in ICT is in a whole nother category of its own :)

          • Snow Crash
            Posted 11/02/2011 at 5:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

            Anyone else though, its just a cheap copy. :}

          • Snow Crash
            Posted 11/02/2011 at 6:59 pm | Permalink | Reply

            ::Snow Crash turns the $3000 FUD upside down to check the makers mark – low and behold “MADE IN CHINA”

        • deteego
          Posted 11/02/2011 at 5:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

          You have to realize, that RS still hasn’t realized that FUD has to be factually incorrect for it to be classified as FUD

          He is still in the thought zone that anything against the NBN is FUD

          • RS
            Posted 13/02/2011 at 12:18 pm | Permalink | Reply

            LOL, after weeks of avoidance, you finally reply, when you believe at last you have a sniff…LOL!

            So where are the reports you keep claiming to be using (especially at ZD)…

            Until you can PROVE anything you claim… not just say I am a UNI student at UNSW, so I know everything about everything (then you intentionally forward “incorrect” damming NBN figures and “laughably” don’t even understand the difference between the Senate and HoR)…

            Umm, you are supplying nothing but FUD… exactly as per your very own URL… dear oh dear..

            Back to Uni son, you have a hell of a lot to learn!

      • Snow Crash
        Posted 11/02/2011 at 6:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

        The tried and proven way to counter FUD is to look carefully at the lies and half-truths and formulate a concise response that sets the record straight. Its hard to argue with the facts.

        Don’t risk your integrity by countering with more FUD. This will make you look impartial.

        Focus on driving the project forward. Not only your success will your revenge, it gains you a broader audience and therefore a bigger platform for advocating change.

        • Snow Crash
          Posted 11/02/2011 at 6:21 pm | Permalink | Reply

          eg. Open source FUD

          Open source is risky
          Destroys your profitability
          Turns you into a communist
          Inclusion on an international watchlist
          You should be quarantined.

    10. username101010101
      Posted 11/02/2011 at 12:37 am | Permalink | Reply

      My question is simply this: how long can we as a nation continue to play games with our economy until it finally comes home and we have to confront the issues that politicians have either swept under the carpet or have deceived us with their lies and subterfuge.

      • Gav
        Posted 13/02/2011 at 12:58 am | Permalink | Reply

        Our debt is a ‘whopping’ 0.3% of GDP, and 10% of annual government spending.

        What exactly is the problem?

        Sure, we are $30bn in debt, but debt is only bad if it is not unmanageable. Debt sounds scary, but if you can repay it easy, it’s really not too bad. How many people have a home loan? car loan? credit card? Why should governments be any different? ;)

        • deteego
          Posted 13/02/2011 at 10:16 am | Permalink | Reply

          Because this debt is enormous and the ability for NBNCo to pay itself off in the best case circumstances has massive risk as outlined in the business case

    11. RS
      Posted 13/02/2011 at 12:11 pm | Permalink | Reply

      It also says paid back in full by 2034 (in the business case)…!

      The same business case which you either laud or call toilet paper, depending upon which day and which “losing” argument you are trying to drag yourself out of…!

    Leave a Comment


  • Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:

    Follow us on social media

    Use your RSS reader to subscribe to our articles feed or to our comments feed.

  • Most Popular Content

  • Enterprise IT stories

    • Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp facepalm2

      If you have even a skin deep awareness of the structure of Australia’s superannuation industry, you’ll be aware that much of the underlying infrastructure used by many of the nation’s major funds is provided by a centralised group, Superpartners. One of the group’s main projects in recent years has been to dramatically update and modernise its IT platform — its version of a core banking platform overhaul. Unfortunately, the $250 million project has not precisely been going well.

    • Qld’s Grant joins analyst firm IBRS peter-grant

      This week it emerged that Peter Grant, the two-time former Queensland Whole of Government CIO (pictured), has joined well-regarded analyst firm Intelligent Business Research Services (IBRS). We’ve long had a high regard for IBRS, and so it’s fantastic to see such an experienced executive join its ranks.

    • Westpac dumps desk phones for Samsung Android mobiles samsung-galaxy-ace-3

      The era of troublesome desk phones tied to physical locations is gradually coming to an end in many workplaces, with mobile phones becoming increasingly popular as organisations’ main method of voice telecommunications. But some groups are more advanced than others when it comes to adoption of the trend. One of those is Westpac.

    • Ministers’ cloud approval lasted just a year reverse

      Remember how twelve months ago, the Federal Government released a new cloud computing security and privacy directive which required departments and agencies to explicitly acquire the approval of the Attorney-General and the relevant portfolio minister before government data containing private information could be stored in offshore facilities? Remember how the policy was strongly criticised by Microsoft, Government CIOs and Delimiter? Well, it looks like the policy is about to be reversed.

    • WA Govt can’t fund school IT upgrades oops key

      In news from The Department of Disturbing Facts, iTNews revealed late last week that Western Australia’s Department of Education has run out of money halfway through the deployment of new fundamental IT infrastructure to the state’s schools.

    • Turnbull outlines Govt ICT vision turnbull-5

      Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has published an extensive article arguing that the Federal Government needed to do a better job of connecting with Australians via digital channels and that public sector IT projects needn’t cost the huge amounts that some have in the past.

    • NZ Govt pushes hard into cloud zealand

      New Zealand’s national Government announced a whole of government contract this morning for what it terms ‘Office Productivity as a Service’ services. This includes email and calendaring services, as well as file-sharing, mobility, instant messaging and collaboration services. The contract complements two existing contracts — Desktop as a Service and Enterprise Content Management as a Service.

    • CommBank reveals Harte’s replacement whiteing

      The Commonwealth Bank of Australia has promoted an internal executive who joined the bank in September after a lengthy career at petroleum giant VP and IT services group Accenture to replace its outgoing chief information officer Michael Harte, who announced in early May that he would leave the bank.

    • Jeff Smith quits Suncorp for IBM jeffsmith4

      Second-tier Australian bank and financial services group Suncorp today announced that its long-serving top technology executive Jeff Smith would leave to take up a senior role with IBM in the United States, in an announcement which marks the end of an era for the nation’s banking IT sector.

    • Small business missing the mobile, social, cloud revolution iphone-stock

      Most companies that live and breathe the online revolution are not tech startups, but smart smaller firms that use online tools to run their core business better: to cut costs, reach customers and suppliers, innovate and get more control. Many others, however, are falling behind, according to a new Grattan Institute discussion paper.

  • Blog, Enterprise IT - Jul 5, 2014 13:53 - 0 Comments

    Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp

    More In Enterprise IT

    Blog, Telecommunications - Jul 5, 2014 12:12 - 0 Comments

    What should the ACCC’s role be in guiding infrastructure spending?

    More In Telecommunications

    Analysis, Industry, Internet - Jun 23, 2014 10:33 - 0 Comments

    ‘Google Schmoogle’ – how Yellow Pages got it so wrong

    More In Industry

    Blog, Digital Rights - Jun 30, 2014 22:24 - 0 Comments

    Will Netflix launch in Australia, or not?

    More In Digital Rights