NBN may not be completed, says Turnbull

204

Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull late last week warned the National Broadband Network may end up not being fully constructed, due to what he described as “the crippling costs of the project” and the likelihood that the Australian Labor Party might lose government in a future election.

The Liberal MP’s comments came after Telstra last week revealed it had been forced to delay a vote to be put to shareholders regarding whether it should go ahead with its $11 billion deal to transfer customers onto the NBN as the new fibre monopoly rolls out its infrastructure around the nation, with NBN Co subsequently stating the deal could affect the timing of the next stage of its fibre rollout plans.

Turnbull said in a blog post that it could be assumed that the delay was the consequence of Telstra’s management taking “great care” to ensure that its shareholders were protected in what would be “a very large and very complex transaction”.

“No doubt central to the negotiations is the very high probability that the NBN is never completed,” Turnbull added. “Most people in the industry I talk to are of the view that even if the Labor Party were to stay in Government the crippling costs of the project will cause it to be abandoned, at least in the form it has been announced.”

Turnbull himself has previously confirmed that should the Coalition form government in Canberra at some future data, that it would stop the construction of the NBN, quickly conduct a cost/benefit analysis into the infrastructure rollout and identify those elements in the infrastructure that should be maintained and integrated, “perhaps into the new separated network company”. The Coalition would also examine areas around the nation that had poor broadband coverage and prioritise them.

Last week the Liberal MP added that if partial completion of the NBN was “a real risk”, Telstra would be insisting in the negotiations that the cost of that risk be bourne by the Federal Government. “One suspects that this issue is one of the reasons for the delay,” said Turnbull.

Ultimately the Shadow Communications Minister saw the delay in terms of a contrast with Julia Gillard’s Labor Government.

“Telstra is taking its time to make sure that the deal is properly analysed and documented and in a form which will be of advantage to its shareholders,” he said. “The Government on the other hand paid scant regard to the interests of its shareholders – taxpayers – and rushed headlong into the deal without any proper analysis, let alone any consideration, of whether the objective of universal fast broadband could be achieved at a lower cost.”

Turnbull’s comments come at a critical legislative time for the NBN rollout. This morning, the Senate is slated to start debate on legislation associated with the fibre project, after both bills passed the House of Representatives several weeks ago with only one minor amendment.

Communications Day reported this morning that Greens Communications Spokesperson Scott Ludlam hadn’t yet taken a voting proposition to his party room. The Greens hold the balance of power in the Senate with five senators — and Ludlam is reported to still be concerned about issues such as cherry picking of NBN infrastructure, scope creep and volume discounting for certain telcos.

Image credit: Office of Malcolm Turnbull

204 COMMENTS

  1. No shit sherlock. No seriously. A large, expensive, multi-term project may be cancelled by the opposition or because it is no longer determined to be viable after a critical assumption of the project proves to be false and the viability of the project no longer applies.

    No doubt someone will try and turn these comments into justification to can the entire project.

    • I bet that Labor is just rubbing their hands together over idiotic statements like this.
      For the Libs to actually say that a vote for them is a vote against FTTH is just plain bad politics.

  2. If this happens then we will have another half-baked network that is available only to a small proportion of the Aussie population (like Telstra and Optus cable). ><

    • @Sean

      Except there is more to Australia’s BB network than HFC cable, you also overlook the majority who can get HFC cable but don’t want it.

      Of course you cannot compare that to the NBN FTTH rollout because umm err – you just can’t.

      • No. You can’t compare them actually. For one thing the primary disadvantage to the current HFC networks is that they are only from one provider.

        If you want to compare the NBN to anything, you need to compare it to the ADSL2+ network and the HFC, since that is what it is replacing.

        How is this so hard for you to understand Alain? Do you think that the low uptake of HFC means that people are fine with ADSL2+? It isn’t that simple. We already know that the power users who want/need the high speed connections are not isolated to specific geographic regions and are in fact spaced randomly throughout the country. So randomly in fact that we cannot predict where we will find one.

        However getting those power users to ad-hoc get a fibre connection is prohibitively expensive meaning they will opt for whatever they can get that best suits their needs, that actually might not be HFC even through they can get it for various reasons.

        For example, my HFC connection has very high jitter in peak periods. If it weren’t for the fact I can’t get ADSL2+ at my house, I would drop them despite the fact that I can get better peak bandwidth. The higher latency, but more stable connection, despite less bandwidth, is preferable to high jitter for my applications.

        The NBN, for the reason, is offering a 12Mbps/1Mbps entry level service for the majority of users because a lot of them don’t know any better. But unfortunately, because we can’t predict who actually will pay for the faster connections it is cheaper to roll it out to everyone.

        In fact with the HFC networks this is exactly what they did, but with a limited geographic footprint because of the high capital cost.

        • We already know that the power users who want/need the high speed connections are not isolated to specific geographic regions and are in fact spaced randomly throughout the country. So randomly in fact that we cannot predict where we will find one.
          *bong*, incorrect

          In fact the truth is the opposite, and there is a whole area in statistics where demand is calculated depending on context.

          Power users are segregated in various geographies (basically mainly cities), which is why commercial investments of FTTH (and other similar services) have always aimed for cities first. Its a basic principle of demand. This means they roll out in areas that are of high demand, and that is where HFC is rolled out.

          Furthermore if you look at it in another point of view, most of the people that live in regional areas live there knowing that they won’t get power level internet service.

          The NBNCo chose to distribute the FTTH completely disregarding demand, that doesn’t mean the demand can’t be calculated or that its “unknown”

          • We have neighbourhood cable in my area, it offers something like 30mbps or what ever it is, its supposed to be damn fast. But I haven’t got it because its freaking expensive for the amount of quota you get.

            So I have to go adsl2+ because thats the next best thing.

            All this HFC around the place is rather expensive compared to adsl2+ which is another reason why people haven’t taken it up.

          • I don’t know what you mean

            Optus HFC (without speedboost, so thats around 30-40mbits) gives very competitive plans (compared to Telstra/iiNet/internode), with 500 to 1000 gigs of monthly allowance plus free local/national calls and whatnot starting at 99 a month (for 500 gig a month). This is obviously bundled, but the story is the same with the other companies previously mentioned

            You can pay an extra $20 a month to go to 100mbit with the speedback. For Telstra is a one off $250 payoff

          • Could you please learn how to read?

            I was obviously replying to his remark about HFC being more expensive compared to ADSL2+

            i.e.
            All this HFC around the place is rather expensive compared to adsl2+ which is another reason why people haven’t taken it up.

            It would help that if you but into conversations, that you actually know what we are arguing about and not go off on some stupid tangent

          • Which has no relevance to your previous comment

            He can’t pay an extra $20 a month to get that “boost” – he doesn’t live in an area with Telstra or Optus cable.

            Again, stop derailing debates please, its blatantly obvious

          • You did derail it, as has been clearly pointed out, glad that you find it hilarious

            I (among others) find it annoying and a form of desperation/potshotting

          • OMG…LOL…that’s even funnier…king of the potshots…

            *banging the table hysterically*

            Just so you know, I’m still compiling a list of all the bullshit you’ve come up with. It’s taking so long. I’ll get back to it now.

          • Just so you know, I’m still compiling a list of all the bullshit you’ve come up with. It’s taking so long. I’ll get back to it now.
            *yawn*

            I just find it amusing that an adult of your age is wasting his time trolling NBN boards (as you are currently doing) and apparently going through and collecting information as a form of personal vendetta (I must be honored that the mighty Michael Wyres is going to such lengths to make me look stupid, I wonder if its due to him trying to defend himself and seeing me as a “threat”?). If I didn’t know your age, I would have guessed you are around 16, because thats what you definitely sound/act like

            Are you getting paid for this, or is it just a way of ventilating your frustration due to the fact that NBN most likely won’t happen, and due to all the “apparent” (according to you) misinformation that is being spread

          • So you are talking about government offices having fiber, in which case there isn’t any issue, as even the coalition agreed to such measures, especially if there is evidence that such demand is actually needed

          • Had to put the final word in there hey Michael, can’t help it? Have some sought of urges?

            Seriously are you getting paid to do this? Its currently peak time for work, and you seem to troll everyone that says anything regarding the NBN throughout the whole day. Furthermore you seem to have a lot of time on your hands to go around delimiter collecting info about me, or is it one of those empty threats to make you look cool over the internet?

            Oh wait, I just realized, you do actually have a vested interest to support the NBN (due to where you work), so you you are getting paid for this, in a way. Which of course makes your word as valuable as any politicians, regardless of how much technical knowledge they happen to have

          • No – it’s fun.
            Ah, bingo!

            So you are acting like a 16 year kid. You are posting for fun, for the hell of it, i.e. trolling. Not taking anything seriously into account, and not actually trying to have a proper debate. You seem to also have a lot of “fun” time on your hands

          • There is no question

            You are just trolling, for fun, after all. Glad you admitted it

          • He is doing VOIP based solutions for some private company in Melbourne, something that would benefit greatly from the NBN if its built, due to the way things like ONT’s are designed.

            Its very obvious if you read his posts that he is heavily biased, it even got bad enough that he said some factually incorrect and stupid statements (off the top of his head) to try and further his agenda.

            You don’t have to take my word for it, just go around the topics on delimiter and make your own opinion

          • I have made my own decision on Michael and he knows what he’s talking about.

            I work for a State Owned Enterprise does that make anything I say biased as we’d obviously benefit from the NBN as well?

          • See…that wasn’t hard was it?

            For the record – my belief in what the NBN is has nothing to do with where I work and what I do. I believe it is a valuable transformation of the entire Australian economy – I believe in the future of this country.

            There is an old saying that goes: “If you always do what you always did, you’ll always get what you always got.”

            Australia has screwed up telecommunications for the last decade or so. The Coalition “plan” does little to change anything – in fact it would enhance Telstra’s position by further committing this country to outdated infrastructure that’s been in the ground for 60 years.

            I get one hell of a laugh out of the “America is doing wireless” debate. I mean, shit – the Yanks don’t get anything wrong do they? Who the hell says they are right?

            America is doing wireless after proposing to do fibre because the powerful telcos in that country threatened to withdraw their political donations.

            Australia – (fortunately) – isn’t in the palm of the big corporates.

            Just because another country is doing something does not mean it is right. For once, Australia has the chance to lead the world.

            I’d rather live in that Australia than the “quietly quietly, carefully carefully” Australia the Coalition stands for.

            And my political leanings are TOWARDS the Coalition. Not against.

            But that doesn’t mean they always get it right.

          • I have made my own decision on Michael and he knows what he’s talking about.
            Regarding VOIP yes, I would agree with you. Everything else, at best, is a blatant biased misrepresentation, at worst is a lie

            I work for a State Owned Enterprise does that make anything I say biased as we’d obviously benefit from the NBN as well?
            If you can explain how, then sure. Most government corporations (state or federal), even including schools and hospitals, are already connected with fiber

          • Not all of our sites are connected by fibre……

            Also it would allow us to provide a better service = more money for us from our ‘clients’

          • I’m sure your sites are only connected by fibre where fibre is available, and the costs of that connection are within budgetary scope.

            Right?

          • that is also correct, it has to be with in budget to get a service out there. We actually have allot of sites running on adsl2+ which is really really bad way of running things but its the only option

          • No one is arguing that government facilities shouldn’t have fiber, Malcolm said he supports this (and he stated so on lateline). This ISN’T an argument for FTTH.

            Also mind explaining which services you would offer that would require 12+ mbit speeds?

          • I am specifically asking what government service that you wish to provide requires home users to have greater speeds then 12/1 (and furthermore if this service is something thats for the general public, and not just a select area).

            You still didn’t answer my question

          • I work for a state IT department. The sites I am talking about are state goverment offices providing services to the public via the staff.

            The staff have to put up with what ever speed they are getting to connect back into the network. Depending on the site we may have up to 5 people sharing the one connection all using Citrix. If they are all on this connection then it becomes very slow for them even if it is 12mbps.

            If they had fibre connected then it’d be like they were in head office with regards to speed of file transfers etc and there work productivity would go up.

            The up speed of 1mbps is not viable at all with 5 people sharing this upload speed, its rather stupid to think you can have these number of people on the connection, but its done at some of our sites because its the only option available at this stage.

          • Ok lets just say Optus cable was available in my area.

            I currently pay $69 per month for naked adsl2+ with 150Gb quota uploads no counted

            Now the closest Optus plan I can find for cable is $99 per month for 120Gb with uploads counted. I don’t have an extra $30 a month in our budget nor do I want uploads counted. It also locks me into a 24 Month contract which as a renter I do not want.

            *checks Telstra website*

            To get a 200Gb quota from Telstra at $69.95 I have to have other stuff bundled with them so again it ends up more expensive that what I have.
            If I get Telstra cable unbundled it is $99.95 on a 24 month contract. Again I do not want to be locked into a contract

            What I can get in my area is Neighbourhood Cable closest to what I am currently paying is $60 a month for 100Gb (50Gb on, 50Gb off) I don’t want the hassle of having to deal with onpeek/offpeek and by the looks of it again uploads counted. The way the internet is used in our house we’d rip through the 50Gb on peek very easily and then we’d be throttled to a slower speed.

            So yeah Cable is not an option for me. But when the NBN passes my door I’m going to jump at it. My house needs it.

          • Im not sure what plan you are talking about, but the Optus fusion plan (which includes line rental, and is also available on their cable) for $99 a month, gives you 500 gig, unlimited local/nation calls and cheap overseas calls
            http://www.optus.com.au/home/broadband/index.html?tas=sem:broadband&cid=ADTXBAU:BAU:OSC:FBB:SEM:BB:15032010&s_kwcid=TC|17952|optus%20cable||S|e|6441299354.

            There are even cheaper “joy” plans with naked DSL for similar amounts of data usage

          • But we are talking about the price of Optus/Telstra cable vs adsl2+ costs.

            Not costs of Optus/Telstra adsl2+ vs other ISP adsl2+ costs.

            So of course I didn’t look at the adsl2+ plans that Optus offered. Even still looking at that plan. I don’t need a home phone, I don’t want to be locked in for 24 months.

            Also I cannot get Optus in my area. I’m on Telstra equipment :P

          • I’m sorry but everything Optus has on offer I get a better deal with what I currently have. Yeah Optus are close in competitive pricing to other ISPs but they want to lock you into contracts or make you spend more moneys

          • As far as I know (or at least for most of the part), Optus has always offered the same plans on ADSL2+ as with their cable

          • Yeah Optus are close in competitive pricing to other ISPs but they want to lock you into contracts or make you spend more moneys
            Most ISP’s (apart from TPG) lock you into long contracts, or compromise in some other area (such as more expensive plan or a inital setup payoff). The optus plan, for example, has no initial setup cost

            In terms of money, they are not more expensive for what they offer. They used to be horrible when they only offered 50 gig, but then they upgraded their internet usage not long ago

          • I don’t work for Optus and I don’t have my internet with them

            I am just displaying the facts, if you are renting then a contract with Optus probably ain’t very smart. We have a very good free market with ISP’s, just way up your options and make a decision

          • Which is what I’ve done….and why something like Optus/Telstras cable is useless. If you want to use it you have to go rent/buy in the area they rolled it out to. If you are renting and move, you have to break contract.

            With the NBN it’ll be everywhere and it’ll be just a matter of taking your mode with you and plugging it in at your next house and bam your on. Non of this shitty connect copper cable to the port at the exchange or activate it or making sure you move to another area that has Optus/Telstra cable

          • I have churned/moved plenty of times, and don’t have this issue you speak of.

            The delays that I have experienced is because of bureaucratic and not technical reasons, mainly Telstra trying to delay things longer then they have to. Moving a cable from the exchange is completely trivial, and its what happens when you churn.

            In any case, any plan to split Telstra (which coalition supports) would fix this problem

          • It’s not going to fix things like moving and finding out you are stuck behind a RIM and get shoddy adsl2 speeds
            or to far away from the exchange to get decent speeds
            or stuck in an area that still has adsl1
            or on a poor copper line that butchers your connection speed down to nothing
            or have an unviable copper line into your house that cannot be used for adsl
            or in an area that doesn’t have adsl1/adsl2 and stuck with 3G along with everyone else in that area making the tower congested and your speeds slow

          • Those issues aren’t a mandate for the NBN, if the coalition implements the ~12/1mbit minimum speeds + splitting Telstra, then all the RIMS would be upgraded, there would be no ADSL only exchanges etc etc

            Furthermore, the number of people that have such problems are in an extreme minority

          • Minority…okay then…

            It might not be a mandate to build the NBN – (I disagree since it survived an election, and actually decided which side the independents chose to support – it WON the election, didn’t LOSE it) – but equally, it is not a mandate to do nothing and let us founder behind the rest of the world with ancient telecommunications infrastructure.

          • extreme minority? My 2nd copper line to my house is unviable for adsl2. The current copper line is pretty shocking as it is. I would expect the whole area to be like this based on the age.

            You really think they’d go around pulling up RIMs? Where are they going to get the land to build exchanges? Allot of the areas that are behind a RIM or 3 are new development areas that are heavy populated and I don’t see room for a new exchange.

            I know an exchange near me is full and it services places up to 8km away from it. There isn’t any land in the area to build another exchange unless they go knock down someones house or take over park land. (which the local residents would get up in arms about)

          • extreme minority? My 2nd copper line to my house is unviable for adsl2. The current copper line is pretty shocking as it is. I would expect the whole area to be like this based on the age.
            Whats your point, you are clearly in that minority

            You really think they’d go around pulling up RIMs? Where are they going to get the land to build exchanges? Allot of the areas that are behind a RIM or 3 are new development areas that are heavy populated and I don’t see room for a new exchange.
            No they just upgrade them, as Telstra has been doing for the past few years. http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum/100

            BTW, as a technical point, what people actually claim are RIM’S are almost always not RIM’s. RIM’s haven’t been deployed for decades

            I know an exchange near me is full and it services places up to 8km away from it. There isn’t any land in the area to build another exchange unless they go knock down someones house or take over park land. (which the local residents would get up in arms about)
            I doubt that it would be impossible to set up a FTTN node, considering they are not the size of an exchange (which would fix that problem), but if there really is no room for a node for FTTN, then you will get FTTH (or wireless if you are in a rural area).

            FTTN does not require an exchange…..

          • The big difference, Michael, is size. Exchanges are usually large buildings, where as FTTN nodes are much smaller in size.

            This wasn’t a question of functionality

          • The nodes have to connect together somewhere for distribution functionality – are you going to leave the FSNs outside in the rain? Or put them in a building for protection? Say an old telephone exchange?

          • You out of all people should know that decent FTTN nodes are built out of bullet proof water tight steel ontop of concrete.

            Such as the choir ones that have been built in NZ. Its the exact same deal with the transformers that you see everywhere

          • Uh, in order to provide 12 mbit VDSL to everyone you would have to spend over $20 billion. I’m from America and AT&T has given up trying to expand its VDSL network because it’s already outdated. When they eventually go for FTTH in however many years, they will have to rebuild the entire network. Why would you spend over $20 billion on an outdated network when you can go all the way with FTTH and make network upgrades infinitely cheaper in the future? Do you know ANY country who is deploying a FTTN NBN? Why are you so stubbornly against FTTH?

          • Im not sure where you are getting figures from, but for the FTTN 98% tender (which is a lot higher in capital costs compared to a FTTH 93%) was ~16 billion total cost (with around ~5 billion in government contribution).

            And furthermore, your comparison with America is retarded because America has very high HFC penetration which is more cost effective to upgrade to provide better speeds then FTTN upgrades (HFC is basically a type of FTTN)

          • Sorry I meant a lot higher capital cost due to % proportion, because the amount of land size that needs to be covered relative to population density increases significantly after 93%

          • Are you really that nieve? Really?

            Okay, so please, tell me how did BT work out which 10 exchanges to give BT Infinity to first?

            They asked their customers.

            And then they tried to do demand calculations for the rest of it, and got it unbelievably wrong. The sites they selected without asking their customers had less than 10% takeup.

            Calculating demand is so complicated that companies just don’t bother.

        • @NightKhaos

          ” For one thing the primary disadvantage to the current HFC networks is that they are only from one provider.”

          Well it’s two providers actually, but never mind.

          “Do you think that the low uptake of HFC means that people are fine with ADSL2+?”

          No, it means they don’t want it, they may not want ADSL2+ either or NBN FTTH, I know it is hard to digest when you are a geek tyre kicker and it is hard to get your head around the concept – but the fact is is many people JUST DON’T NEED IT!

          BTW aww I sympathise with your HFC jitter problems I really do, it’s bloody outrageous!, it changes my whole outlook on the NBN rollout, we have to taxpayer fund NightKhaos’s jitter problem with FTTH – priority ONE! :)

          • HFC networks are only from one provider. Each network only has one provider. Meaning that in a lot of areas you can get one provider, but not that other.

            No, it means they don’t want it, they may not want ADSL2+ either or NBN FTTH, I know it is hard to digest when you are a geek tyre kicker and it hard to get your head around the concept – but that fact is many people JUST DON’T NEED IT!

            What is the current uptake numbers for a fixed line connection? According to the ABS there are 4.25 million homes as of June 2010, up from 4.17 million homes in Jun 2009. I get my head around the concept perfectly, it seems you don’t. Sometimes HFC is not the best solution to the internet needs. The jitter on my connection I used as an example to prove this point.

            There is another poster here, PointZeroOne, who is saying they can’t afford HFC cable in their area because they cannot get enough quota on one of the plans compared to ADSL2+ because all the uploads are counted.

            Those are just two examples as to why some person might opt for ADSL2+ over HFC. I’m sure you’ll find many more, and not all of them are going to be that the customer doesn’t want the extra speed from HFC cable as you seem to be trying to indicate with your posts, and not all of them are going to be that the price of the higher speed connection is too much so the customer will opt for the cheaper option either.

          • @NightKhaos

            “HFC networks are only from one provider. Each network only has one provider.”

            lol that’s TWO networks and TWO providers then, 1+1=2.

            ” Meaning that in a lot of areas you can get one provider, but not that other.”

            Oh yeah? – Telstra followed Optus around suburb by suburb, name all these ‘lot of areas’ that only have Optus HFC or only have Telstra HFC but not both?

            “What is the current uptake numbers for a fixed line connection? According to the ABS there are 4.25 million homes as of June 2010, up from 4.17 million homes in Jun 2009. I get my head around the concept perfectly, it seems you don’t.”

            Yeah and there was also a loss in the 2010 Financial year of Telstra net line cancellations of 200,000 – the last report covering the last six months had it around 40,000.

            ” Sometimes HFC is not the best solution to the internet needs.”

            Good we agree, then all you have to do is agree that FTTH is not the best solution either – come on say it, it won’t hurt.

            “The jitter on my connection I used as an example to prove this point.”

            So was my response to your jitter problem.

            “There is another poster here, PointZeroOne, who is saying they can’t afford HFC cable in their area because they cannot get enough quota on one of the plans compared to ADSL2+ because all the uploads are counted.”

            Yes I read that, but then again he doesn’t know what he is going to pay for a NBN Plan either, and I mean the proper market commercial pricing, not the current heavily subsidised pilot phase pricing.

    • That is the most likely outcome

      This is what happens when you rollout a royles royce version of the internet with completely political interests, which for this reason, doesn’t have bipartisan support plus takes a ridiculous amount of time to rollout (which is being delayed, even more, its already been delayed by 3 years). Furthermore the areas being rolled out will provide less income to NBNCo, since they are areas with low demand and/or population densities. This isn’t even taking into account issues such as Labor shortage or issues with debt (or any of the other issues) that can (and most likely will) delay it even further, plus issues surrounding legislation

      If it was a properly done FTTN, ~80% of it would have already been done in a single term of government.

      • If it was a properly done FTTN, ~80% of it would have already been done in a single term of government

        Then where is the 80% of the OPEL networks?

        • Conroy cancelled it, the OPEL wasn’t started right at the start of the term. It got announced in 2005, just 2 years before the election (and that was only the announcement).

          Labor government (apparently) already had their NBN MKII organised before the election

          • And you don’t include the “tender process” in the FTTN rollout for some strange reason? Seriously? It’ll take one and a half terms minimum and you know it.

  3. The biggest problem with the NBN is the huge cost associated with the many contractors that will be needed to get the job done and you can bet that they will not be the ones holding the bag if all this goes south! The second biggest problem is advances in technology in regards to wirless broadband. Today fibre optics is the way to go but what happens in 5 years when wireless technology catches up. TAXPAYERS spend $40 billion on outdated technology but are bound to it until the cost is recouped.

    • Yes, the contractors and laying of the cable is the biggest expense of the project. This is obvious.

      But no. Wireless is not going to “catch up” in five years to Fibre Optics. Wireless doesn’t scale well in areas of large population density because of the very high spectrum requirements, so no. Wireless is as much a threat to Fibre Optics as a sports car is a threat to bulk freight company using road trains.

      • Wireless doesn’t have to play ‘catchup’ to fibre optics, it’s not just about a technical tyre kick, it is the popularity of the wireless products in themselves and the overwhelming marketing onslaught
        power of the manufacturers like Apple, HTC etc.

        Telstra alone signed up 400,000 IPhone customers in the last six months much of it at the expense of fixed line, if I was a investor I know where my money would be going, problem is the sucker taxpayer doesn’t have that choice, it’s backing the loser fixed line FTTH.

        New users queue around the block for new wireless based releases from Apple, the forums are full of discussions on smartphones, Pads, tablets and their operating systems new releases, customers don’t hang around the NBN Co HQ with placards stating “Me first”.

        • @alain
          Ever thought that the ‘popularity’ is because its new and people dont have it yet? But people HAVE fixed line, so those numbers are not going to increase. Common sense says that. And the reason why the tablets etc are all abuzz, thereby adding fuel to the fire, is because people are abandoning what they HAVE to get them. Giving up one connection that is wireless for another. Do they say “we have XXX customers!” or do they say they signed up new ones counting a new product, even to the same person, as a new customer? Its a new contract so it has to be right?

          And you are right with the coalitions message: Here Telstra! Here is your monopoly again! We wont let anyone come at you and try and level the playing field again. What’s that? Oh sure, we will regulate that for you!

        • Wireless doesn’t have to play ‘catchup’ to fibre optics, it’s not just about a technical tyre kick, it is the popularity of the wireless products in themselves and the overwhelming marketing onslaught
          power of the manufacturers like Apple, HTC etc.

          Irrelevant actually. All of the wireless devices you mentioned are a generic conduit device that work via either WiFi or some other radio technology (3G, LTE). The popularity of the devices is significant, but they do not in anyway indicate that there is a waning demand for fixed line connections. In fact the ABS statistics seems to indicate that there is increasing demand for wired connections.

          New users queue around the block for new wireless based releases from Apple, the forums are full of discussions on smartphones, Pads, tablets and their operating systems new releases, customers don’t hang around the NBN Co HQ with placards stating “Me first”.

          No they queue around the block for an iPhone. The device. They won’t queue around the block for an LTE or 3G connection from Telstra will they? Because that is what we are talking about. We are talking about the connection method, not the device.

        • “Telstra alone signed up 400,000 IPhone customers in the last six months much of it at the expense of fixed line”

          Lets just say that, that figure of 400,000 iPhones sold were people who share a house with 4 people who all bought iPhones.

          Thats 100,000 houses, thats 100,000 fixed lines, but each person in these houses needs a mobile phone so of course ‘mobile internet’ is going to appear to be a on bigger uptake because there is allot more people than houses

    • Wireless is a complementary service, it will never compete with fibre, and no fibre will not be outdated, as the medium is the fastest growing deployment medium in the world. They already run 100G on fibre and still developing technology that can go faster, they are not developing a new medium, only developing the technology that makes fibre handle faster network traffic. Once again wireless will never provide the bandwidth fibre can handle, unless you can change the laws of physics.

    • True.

      I’ve worked for 3 of the gov’ts contractors who have been given the task to build the network, ive also worked for Telstra and a few other telcos in AU, of smaller size (ie. Tier 2).

      Truth be told, the ethics, professionalism and skills standards of our current infrastructure builders leaves a lot to be desired. The industry is rife with worker disputes and resentment. The telco construction industry I think needs to be properly explored before the govt can actually commission them with billions of dollars of project funds. Must consider how far theyve falled, ie. casual staff, poorly trained staff, and small time corruption and nepotism etc.

      This comes about as a result of Telstra’s 15 years of sheddnig its workers from its infrastructure division and outsourcing it to external contractor companies, which are largely building and construction companies. While Telstra keeps a port of its network building and maintenance staff, a large portion of the work is issued to contractors, most of whom are on the governments preferred contractor list because those are the only main players in the industry.

      The network will only be built as well and as efficiently as the quality and integrity of the contractors, and from what Ive seen, they’re not the most ethnical of operators by Australian standards.

  4. So what Malcolm is saying – (with the “may be cancelled by future governments” bit) – is that if the NBN fails to be completed, it would be the Coalitions fault?

    • I’m fairly confident that if the Coalition gets into power, without an extreme change in their opinions of Telecommunications, the NBN will be at least stripped down to a limited (high return) footprint all the way to completely scrapped. This concerns me deeply as I am not sure that Coalition can adequately address the problems the industry are facing, or even worse, they simply can’t see how telecommunications is becoming a vital part of our economy.

    • It certainly sounds like he’s saying, ‘Don’t vote for us or we’ll kill the NBN’.

      Come on Malcolm, I thought you were better than that. The reason Telstra is uneasy about it is because the Liberal party is saying they will demolish the NBN.

      The Liberal party is creating uncertainty and then pointing to that uncertainty as a reason it won’t work. FFS!

      • @Martin Eddy

        “The reason Telstra is uneasy about it is because the Liberal party is saying they will demolish the NBN.”

        They are?

          • Come on. Use your brains and apply it to your own previous comments in other parts of the thread.

            “…at least the Coalition no NBN FTTH message is consistent., even post election they lost, there can be no doubt as to where they stand, and they feel they can win the next election with it…”

            Of course they’ll kill it off.

            They’re going to look like a right royal bunch of wankers if they win an election based on killing of the NBN, but then keep it.

            As for the link – Malcolm says they’ll stop it, evaluate what has already been done and work out what they can use in setting up another company.

            That’s “stopping the NBN”, but creating an NBN by another name – a technically inferior one and creating more delay in providing a solution to the public, while they dick arse around doing nothing for 12 or 18 months doing all this “evaluation”.

            The biggest problem with the piecemeal solution the Coalition put up is that once the 12Mbps they promised is no longer enough, someone will have to spend another truckload of money upgrading us to the next “acceptable” speed level.

            In the end, it won’t cost any less.

            The NBN natively has capacity for 40Gbps based on existing technology. So 50 years from now when people are asking for those speeds, we’ll have the infrastructure to do it.

            Under the Coalition, we either won’t have it, or we’ll have built the NBN anyway later, wasting the initial outlay on a stop-gap measure.

          • I think you have got hold of the wrong end of the stick, my emphasis in response to Martin Eddy was this bit:

            “The reason Telstra is uneasy about it is because ….”

            I was querying the so called ‘reason’ given that Telstra was uneasy!

          • It’s fairly bloody simple really.

            They are looking at getting $11b. If the NBN doesn’t go ahead, they won’t be getting it. Fairly good reason to be uneasy I would have thought.

          • Yes but Telstra’s future viability is not dependant on a $11b cash injection courtesy of the taxpayer, if it was that simple why are they still thinking about it, it’s been on the table for a while now, they could put to shareholders asap, get approval, pump the money into the Apple Corporation as a wireless products based co-partner, and NextG 4G and beyond :) and it’s all done and dusted and paid for before the next election date has even been announced.

            Telstra has just announced a new ‘renaissance age’ with HFC, increasing the high speed capability to even more areas.
            Certainly doesn’t doesn’t like a company winding down its HFC for NBN takeover to me, oh and BTW the two biggest ISP’s BigPond and Optus have yet to announce they are selling NBN Plans – funny that!

          • If you were a member of the Telstra board – and the government wants to give you $11b – are you going to hinder or encourage that process?

          • The real world is not so simple mate, Telstra is not just being given $11 billion. If they were, there wouldn’t be any objections, and there wouldn’t be any deal with NBN ;)

          • @MichealWyres

            “If you were a member of the Telstra board – and the government wants to give you $11b – are you going to hinder or encourage that process?”

            So if it is so great how come shareholders have not the got the deal in front of them to make a decision with the boards Yes recommendation ready to vote on it at the next meeting in July?

          • As with any business deal, all sides – (NBNCo/government and Telstra) – are no doubt seeking to maximise every last detail of the agreement to get the maximum benefit from the deal.

            Telstra are legally required as a listed company to deliver the best outcome for their shareholders. The government would be seeking to minimise their costs for the project.

            Since you’ve obviously got a greater insight as to what is going on with the negotiations, would you care to share them with us?

  5. Leave it to Tony Abbott, He know whato do for the best (not).
    His track record shows him to be about as reliable as a loose cannon on a rolling high sea. Changing his mind with every new wave. This man will sink the good ship Australia if we give him the powder.

  6. Coalition needs to get control of both houses to be able to stop it, its rare for a political party to get control of both houses, howard did it, but it doesnt happen often..

    Also, even if coalition gets control of both houses, NBN, Telstra (and other corporation) will no doubt be making sure the legislation is water tight to stop the Feds from having an easy way out. And they will get that protection im sure.

    Another case of libs scare mongering, they cant do anything, they are trying to stop anyone else from doing stuff.

    • No they don’t, the NBN is a GBE who’s primary controller is Steven Conroy via the government that is providing the funding (which would end up transferring to Malcolm Turnbull should coalition win). Malcom can simply cancel the NBN contracts and cease funding to NBNCo and dissipate it, as has been done with so many government projects in the past

      You don’t need control of both houses in the parliament to stop or delay or cancel the NBN. In fact the only reason that both houses are involved in the first place is because of all of the retarded legislation required to make NBN work, not the other way around

  7. Of course everyone forgets that the first thing Conroy did when Rudd won Government from Howard was to cancel the Coalition Optus led OPEL infrastructure rollout.

    The next thing Conroy did was to cancel the private/public partnership FTTN/FTTH tender they went into that that election with as their communications policy platform.

    At least the Coalition no NBN FTTH message is consistent., even post election they lost, there can be no doubt as to where they stand, and they feel they can win the next election with it.

      • I wasn’t impressed by the OPEL plan either, but you and I are not the sole judges of what constitutes a ‘better plan’.

        In the end game cancelling the NBN FTTH rollout either because of outrageous cost or a coalition election victory may well be the ‘better plan’.

        • You are again speculating. Please stop doing that. Until we actually know what the oppositions plan is, we cannot call it better. So far what they have offered is not better, and that is what we have to go by.

          I’m sure the Coalition are capable of coming up with a better plan which suits a lot more people than the NBN does and still addresses the core problem, but considering the arguments they are using against the NBN I am not confident.

          • Oh I know that. We’ve had this debate before. Does not change the fact I am not confident in them being able to produce an adequate plan.

          • The plan already exists, its just not part of their official policy because it would change depending on the progress of NBN

            Malcolm has already stated that it would be a mix of FTTN/FTTH and a bit of wireless while giving everyone ~12/1 mbit speeds. How much it will cost depends on how much the NBN has rolled out, but considering the price of the NBN mk1 tender for 98% which had completely minimal government contribution, it would be multitudes cheaper then NBN (also the fact that technologically speaking FTTN is a lot cheaper then FTTH)

            Thats all you honestly need to know, and thats what the coalition has been stating for zonks

          • That’s all I need to know?

            Okay. All you need to know is that the NBN will cost taxpayers $0 after the debt has been repayed, will provide speeds up to 1Gbps/400Mbps on the initial hardware to 93% of the country with the last 7% being serviced by wireless and satellite.

          • Thats all we knew about the NBN before the election (well actually they said there would be private investment, which never happened for obvious reasons)

            Honestly whats different?

            Before Labor got reelected, Conroy just announced that the NBN is now a 90% FTTH with no other information apart from an appropriate cost. Thats the only thing people knew

            There is more information NOW, but thats because Labor got reelected and is currently in minority government and are trying build the damn thing (as well as defend it). It was a f**ken different story before the election

          • You seriously expect people to make an informed decision based upon so little information don’t you?

            So tell me, if the Coalition do get into power, and then we find out the plan they brought to election is actually a piece of crap, just like what apparently you found out with the NBN as more things came to light, it’s okay for us to complain as loudly as possible against it?

            Alright good, I’ll see you in 3 years. Assuming the Coalition get into power.

          • You seriously expect people to make an informed decision based upon so little information don’t you?
            The amount of people that actually care about the internet to such a degree is an extreme minority, and we had to make such a decision with the NBN MK2 before the reelection

            So tell me, if the Coalition do get into power, and then we find out the plan they brought to election is actually a piece of crap,

            In my opinion we are currently in this situation, except its the Labor party that are in power that providing a plan which is a piece of crap. They changed their policy, iirc, 3 weeks before the election (at which point no one had any idea what was happening with the NBN)

            Alright good, I’ll see you in 3 years. Assuming the Coalition get into power.
            That is looking quite likely

          • @MichealWyres

            “The nodes have to connect together somewhere for distribution functionality – are you going to leave the FSNs outside in the rain? Or put them in a building for protection? Say an old telephone exchange?”

            You know very well that FTTN node cabinets servicing a neighbourhood area are weatherproof and are not the equivalent of the Telstra exchange buildings, you only have to look at the pictures of FTTN infrastructure deployments overseas to see that.

          • The amount of people that actually care about the internet to such a degree is an extreme minority, and we had to make such a decision with the NBN MK2 before the reelection

            I am aware that the people who actually give a shit is a minimal. You’ll find the people that actually give a shit what the government does in general in minimal. The majority of people I know let the government do their thing, listen to the papers bitch for a couple of years, and then listen to the scare campaigns up to the election, and then vote pretty much blind.

            But that isn’t an excuse for you not to provide as much information as possible when you finally bring your policy to the table. On and BTW, this is not a double standard, I apply the same judgement to the NBN here, and so far I’m okay with the policy.

            That is looking quite likely

            To clarify I don’t exactly have a problem with them being in power, or in principle them scrapping the NBN, but I will have a problem if they offer a half arsed solution that is going to further delay the problem unnecessary rather than taking action. We have already have two tender processes for this problem, effectively a waste of 5 years.

          • And I hope that they roll the NBN past my area in that time period just in case the other mob get in and scrap it (making the money already put into the NBN a large waste)

          • The money put into the NBN is a large waste regardless of how much of it is completed

          • @NightKhaos

            Well I’m not speculating, Conroy DID cancel OPEL and the Coalition DOES have a no NBN policy.

            I am not speculating if the Coalition have a better plan or not, we will have to wait until 2 days before the election (as per usual), but we can take a pretty good punt on what part of it would be.

            Any NBN Co rollout active at election time will be sold off to a private or a public/private partnership interest, that’s what Labor would have done anyway, the Coalition would just accelerate it.

            The beautiful irony would be if Telstra and/or SingTel get it at garage sale pricing because no one else is interested!

            The rest is Coalition election policy yet to be announced.

          • Then what do you call it? If not speculation then what?

            Drawing a conclusion based upon little evidence and then trying to push it as the most likely outcome despite arguments presented to the contrary?

            The fact that the Greens are pushing to have the NBN privatisation clause (I’ve mentioned this to you before) is irrelevant is it?

            And how is “punting” on a good part of the Coalition policy NOT speculation?

          • NightKhas, People in glass houses shouldnt throw stones.

            In your earlier post you stated…

            “I’m sure the Coalition are capable of coming up with a better plan which suits a lot more people than the NBN does and still addresses the core problem, but considering the arguments they are using against the NBN I am not confident.

            Isnt that speculation ?

            No big deal though, speculating is completely acceptable on forums, dont see why your concerned. It would be hard to plan ahead if we only spoke of facts.

          • Sorry Glenn. There is a very specific reason I said that.

            Alain here has a very strong history of using his speculation to push a specific agenda.

            He has attempted to use the “deals” for Customers between Optus and Telstra as an explanation as to why thr NBN will be a commercial failure despite the fact no such deal between Telstra and Optus exists. He would ignore it every time this was pointed out to him and continue to peddle it as far as refering to the deal in post tense.

            Yes, Speculation is fine, this was actually more of a warning to him rather than actually telling him he’s wrong.

            Before you accuse me of throwing stones it might be useful to understad the history.

          • @Nightkhaos

            “Alain here has a very strong history of using his speculation to push a specific agenda.’

            Really? so what agenda is that oh wise one?

            “He has attempted to use the “deals” for Customers between Optus and Telstra as an explanation as to why thr NBN will be a commercial failure despite the fact no such deal between Telstra and Optus exists.”

            I have not linked that to the ‘commercial failure’ of NBN as such you did, but come to think of it just how viable would the NBN without Optus and Telstra customers on board?

            ” He would ignore it every time this was pointed out to him and continue to peddle it as far as refering to the deal in post tense.”

            I have asked you and others before this question , you absolutely guarantee that not one dollar will pass to Telstra and Optus for their client bases to be migrated to the NBN?

            It’s always met with a stony silence, so I repeat it again, here is your chance to make a name for yourself as a super guru.

            “Yes, Speculation is fine, this was actually more of a warning to him rather than actually telling him he’s wrong.”

            No I didn’t think you would tell me I’m wrong, and ouch thanks for the warning, akin to being hit on the head with a feather.

          • Really? so what agenda is that oh wise one?

            I’m not actually sure. Your posts come up somewhat inconsistent. If I had to guess I’d say you’re board and you just want to incite debate, you’re doing quite well on that front I might add. Kudos.

            I have not linked that to the ‘commercial failure’ of NBN as such you did, but come to think of it just how viable would the NBN without Optus and Telstra customers on board?

            I haven’t linked it to the failure either. I have instead linked to to ensuring success of the project. If the deal between NBN Co and Telstra goes through it gives NBN Co enough customers by default (i.e. through migration) to ensure success. Without it they will have to compete for customers which increases risk, but does not mean it will fail as you continuity assert whenever this argument is brought up.

            I have asked you and others before this question , you absolutely guarantee that not one dollar will pass to Telstra and Optus for their client bases to be migrated to the NBN?

            Well, first of all, we have conceeded that money is being passed to Telstra, hence the big deal, the deal you are using as the basis for this arguement IN THE FIRST PLACE.

            As for Optus, no I can’t guarantee that, what do I look like, Mike Quigby? Surely not, for one thing I have hair. It doesn’t matter that a deal is a possibility, you continued referring to the deal between Optus and NBN Co as if it was assured. You cannot guarantee that money will be passed to migrate customers any more than I can guarantee that it won’t.

            It’s always met with a stony silence, so I repeat it again, here is your chance to make a name for yourself as a super guru.

            Because it’s a null argument. See above. You’re trying to make me guarantee something that I can’t, and when I can’t you think that is validation for your agruement, when in fact the same argument applies to you. Why would I bother responding to that?

            No I didn’t think you would tell me I’m wrong, and ouch thanks for the warning, akin to being hit on the head with a feather.

            Oh but I have told you you’re wrong. You’re wrong that a deal between Optus and NBN Co is assured. You’re wrong 70% uptake is an unreasonable figure for the NBN Co to reach for. You’re wrong that you can link the increase in demand for the iPhone to a waning demand for fixed line connectivity.

            There, I just told you you’re wrong, and if that feels like getting hit by a feather, I think you’ve got a really thick skull.

          • @NightKhaos

            “I haven’t linked it to the failure either. I have instead linked to to ensuring success of the project.”

            Is followed by:

            “If the deal between NBN Co and Telstra goes through it gives NBN Co enough customers by default (i.e. through migration) to ensure success.”

            So without Telstra customers it’s not a success – so you are agreeing with me, so we can put that one to bed.

            Oh hang on then you change your mind:

            ” Without it they will have to compete for customers which increases risk, but does not mean it will fail”

            What you might call having a bet both ways eh NK?

            “Because it’s a null argument.”

            It’s not a null argument just because you want to cough up the bleeding obvious answer.

            “You’re wrong that a deal between Optus and NBN Co is assured.”

            Want a bet?

            ” You’re wrong 70% uptake is an unreasonable figure for the NBN Co to reach for.”

            So you agree, no argument there then. :)

            “You’re wrong that you can link the increase in demand for the iPhone to a waning demand for fixed line connectivity.”

            Well it’s not JUST the Iphone popular as it is, it is wireless connectivity in general from all sorts of devices, including a USB modem hung off a stock standard PC or laptop running Windows or Apple OS.

            I see the avalanche of fixed line disconnections in the Telstra reports every year relative to the avalanche of new connections to wireless every year from ALL the wireless providers, and come to a strong trend conclusion that is mirrored world wide with all the incumbent Telco’s.

            I don’t see NBN FTTH reversing that trend in any way no matter how dirt cheap plan taxpayer subsidised it is, because having even faster fixed line BB availability is not the reason customers are flocking to wireless and disconnecting from fixed line in the ten’s of thousands every Telstra reporting period.

          • So without Telstra customers it’s not a success – so you are agreeing with me, so we can put that one to bed.

            There’s a difference between a “not-guaranteed success” and “guaranteed failure”. With the Telstra deal, success is practically guaranteed. Without the Telstra, success is not guaranteed, but neither is failure.

            “You’re wrong that a deal between Optus and NBN Co is assured.”

            Want a bet?

            The deal is not finalised, so it’s not assured. Is it likely? Yes, it’s likely, but you’re assuming it has already happened.

            ” You’re wrong 70% uptake is an unreasonable figure for the NBN Co to reach for.”

            So you agree, no argument there then. :)

            In case it wasn’t clear, he means your claim that “70% uptake is unreasonable” is wrong.

            I see the avalanche of fixed line disconnections in the Telstra reports every year relative to the avalanche of new connections to wireless every year from ALL the wireless providers, and come to a strong trend conclusion that is mirrored world wide with all the incumbent Telco’s.

            Well that’s the problem: you’re looking at fixed-line connections for Telstra only and then comparing it against wireless connection across all providers.

            This has been linked to time and time again, but fixed-line broadband is not decreasing! In fact, fixed-line broadband is on the increase. Moreover, data usage on mobile wireless is actually on the decline – whereas fixed-line data usage is increasing.

          • @Dean

            “there’s a difference between a “not-guaranteed success” and “guaranteed failure”. With the Telstra deal, success is practically guaranteed. Without the Telstra, success is not guaranteed, but neither is failure.”

            Oh I see, so tell me how do you get to the magic figure of 70% NBN uptake when BigPond holds 43% of the retail BB market?

            ” You’re wrong 70% uptake is an unreasonable figure for the NBN Co to reach for.”

            Why is it wrong? is it 2018 already?

            “Well that’s the problem: you’re looking at fixed-line connections for Telstra only”

            Well Telstra is the only fixed line copper provider, where else do you suggest I look?

            “This has been linked to time and time again, but fixed-line broadband is not decreasing! In fact, fixed-line broadband is on the increase.”

            New fixed line BB connections has virtually flat lined, the best ISP’s can do now is poach customers from each other.

            ” Moreover, data usage on mobile wireless is actually on the decline – whereas fixed-line data usage is increasing.”

            Where is your data coming from on that one? it is interesting you read it as a decline in the face of thousands of new 3G wireless connections that are sold every week and these figures JUST from the largest wireless provider?

            http://www.zdnet.com.au/iphone-data-usage-well-under-cap-thodey-339305198.htm

            Despite this, the vast majority of the telco’s network usage is now for data not voice, according to Thodey.

            “Remember, when you look at the wireless network, 10 per cent of the traffic is or actually less than 10 per cent is now voice, 90 per cent is all IP packets of data,” he said. “So that is where the growth is, and if you are profiling any network, it is definitely around the data.”

          • Well Telstra is the only fixed line copper provider, where else do you suggest I look?

            Copper connections != fixed-line broadband connections. There are many providers of fixed-line broadband.

            New fixed line BB connections has virtually flat lined, the best ISP’s can do now is poach customers from each other.

            Right, the market is becoming saturated, but it’s still increasing. You simply cannot say that wireless connections are “poaching” fixed-line customers because the statistics simply do not reflect that. Fixed-line broadband is still increasing.

            Where is your data coming from on that one? it is interesting you read it as a decline in the face of thousands of new 3G wireless connections that are sold every week and these figures JUST from the largest wireless provider?

            You really don’t read what people write before replying do you? The data is coming from that Australian Bureau of Statistics article. Read the section titled “Volume of data downloaded”. Compare December 2009 with June 2010.

            You’ve been pointed to that Bureau of Statistics article numerous times, I think it’s about time you actually read it. It’s not long, just read it.

          • Oh I see, so tell me how do you get to the magic figure of 70% NBN uptake when BigPond holds 43% of the retail BB market?

            Do you remember how part of the Telstra deal is shutting down the copper network? Where do you think all of the current fixed-line customers are going to go when the copper is shut down? You think they’re all going to switch to wireless?

          • @Dean

            “copper connections != fixed-line broadband connections. There are many providers of fixed-line broadband.”

            I am not referring to Telstra resellers of PSTN, LSS or ULL as you well know, I am referring to fixed line disconnections from the monopoly supplier of fixed line copper in Australia.

            “Right, the market is becoming saturated, but it’s still increasing. You simply cannot say that wireless connections are “poaching” fixed-line customers because the statistics simply do not reflect that. Fixed-line broadband is still increasing.”

            You are totally ignoring the fixed line disconnection rate as if it doesn’t exist, it’s been a trend in the Telstra reports for at least the last 10 years, and it accelerating not remaining static.
            It also reflects the trend of incumbent Telco’s overseas, in fact the Telstra rate compared to most of them looks good!

            “You really don’t read what people write before replying do you? The data is coming from that Australian Bureau of Statistics article. Read the section titled “Volume of data downloaded”. Compare December 2009 with June 2010.”

            Yeah I read it but I don’t believe it, I noticed it had ‘revised’ against the figure, I think they need to revise it again.

            http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/358052/love_affair_smartphones_deepen_analyst/

            “In the last three months of 2009 alone, IDC says, over 1.31 million smartphones were shipped, and in 2009 the total number of Australian smartphone shipments exceeded 4 million to be the highest annual total on record.

            At the end of Q1 2010, Australian smartphone penetration rose to an all time high of 48.1 per cent of new mobile device shipments, and IDC is now expecting that by the end of this year, smartphones will outpace traditional mobile phones.”

            … and wireless data is falling? – you have to be joking!

          • I am not referring to Telstra resellers of PSTN, LSS or ULL as you well know, I am referring to fixed line disconnections from the monopoly supplier of fixed line copper in Australia.

            Fixed-line disconnections are irrelevant, we’re talking about broadband here. Fixed-line broadband is still increasing. If people were actually disconnecting their broadband in order to switch to wireless, then you’d have a point. But they’re not.

            Yeah I read it but I don’t believe it

            If you’re not going to believe statistics published the Bureau of Statistics, then what’s the point of even arguing?

            “In the last three months of 2009 alone, IDC says, over 1.31 million smartphones were shipped, and in 2009 the total number of Australian smartphone shipments exceeded 4 million to be the highest annual total on record.

            … and wireless data is falling? – you have to be joking!

            Again, you’re just looking at the number of smartphones. Yes, people are buying more smart phones, I’ve already acknowledged that. But it doesn’t change the fact that people are not disconnecting their fixed-line broadband.

          • You are right I still don’t believe it, I would love to know where they get that volume data from, it has to be a one off statistical aberration or a error, it is possible you know.

            http://www.digital-media.net.au/article/Mobile-broadband-3G-and-data-usage-surge-in-latest-ACMA-report/509241.aspx

            Wireless subscribers up 162% from the previous reporting period.

            Wireless BB subscribers comprised 25% of all internet subscribers at June 2009 up from 11% in the previous year.
            It would be much higher in 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 because the IPhone 4 ,Ipad and new range from Android based HTC smartphones figures would be adding to the growth.

            Sorry wireless BB based products ARE eating into fixed line BB, yes many have both, but if one is to be dropped it will be fixed line.

          • Wireless BB subscribers comprised 25% of all internet subscribers at June 2009 up from 11% in the previous year.

            Percentages don’t mean anything, you need to look at the relative number of connections of each type year-on-year. Yes mobile wireless connections (i.e. mobile phones, etc) are increasing. Nobody is disputing that. However, the number of fixed-line broadband connections is not decreasing.

            If you don’t have any data that suggests wireless data using is increasing, I’m going to continue to trust the ABS.

            It may very well be an aberration, maybe mobile data usage is increasing over a longer period (in fact, it probably is with a longer time-line – e.g. 2000 – 2011), but it certainly shows that there’s no “explosion” of mobile data usage in recent times.

            And it certainly doesn’t show people are disconnecting their fixed-line broadband in favour of mobile wireless.

          • “Yes mobile wireless connections (i.e. mobile phones, etc) are increasing. Nobody is disputing that.”

            That’s not what the stats increase say, it is ‘wireless broadband subscribers’ not just mobile phones connecting on say a capped call voice plan.

            I still say you cannot have a increase in wireless BROADBAND subscribers and I mean quite hefty percentage increases without a corresponding increase in wireless data volumes, it is just not possible.

            You don’t spend big $$ on a nice touchscreen smartphone brimming with data based apps either outright or on a monthly locked in 24 month plan with a reasonable to quite large data allowance (which seems to increase every 6 months) and then just use it to send 25c SMS’s or use it like a $40 Nokia mobile for voice calls only.

          • That’s not what the stats increase say, it is ‘wireless broadband subscribers’ not just mobile phones connecting on say a capped call voice plan.

            First of all, most mobile phone plans have built-in data these days anyway. So whether you’re actually planning to use that data or not, you’re still getting a “data connection”.

            Secondly, even if all that is true. Even if the ABS is wrong about the amount of data usage on mobile wireless broadband, it still doesn’t change the fact that fixed-line broadband connections and fixed-line broadband usage is not decreasing – in fact, it’s increasing. It doesn’t change the fact that wireless data usage is not “eating into” the fixed-line market.

    • Good boy elaine…

      FTTN/FTTH tender (it was actually referred to a RFP) but close enough…

      Seems you can teach an old FUDster new tricks…!

  8. So if I get this right, we shouldnt do the NBN because someone else may take over and cancel it. I’d love to see a company run like that, I’d have no work to do at all!

    • But this ‘company’ is unique Glen B, it is political based company, the taxpayers are the shareholders, it is supported and paid for at the whim of the political party who holds power, that political cycle is temporary and is at the fickle whim of the voters, who vote for all sorts of reasons, not just the NBN.

      • That isn’t unique. Not even close. Most ‘companies’ like these are just left to their own devices because they are no longer politically popular because they work.

        The NBN is just new and shiny and fun to try and poke holes in by the opposition.

        • Well actually it is, because this company is receiving massive funding from government bonds (i.e. tax payers money), which tax payers actually do pay the interest on those bonds up until ~2020 from the contingency fund

          No company would normally be able to do that (at all). If NBNCo got all of its funding itself, and not from the government, that would be a totally different story. What is happening in Australia with NBN is definitely unique, in fact its as unique as the definition of the word, that is no one in the world is currently doing it

          • What it is doing and how it doing it may be unique, but that doesn’t make the concept of a Goverment Owned Enterprise unique in the content that alain described it unique.

            Do you think there is something fundamentally wrong with finding a new way to fund a large project like this? Your assumptions against it are all based upon some delusion that it will fail an epic deaf after somehow also magically inflating the costs ten fold thus making generations pay for it for years to come.

            And yes deteego, I am playing you directly, because I know exactly how you are going to respond to this.

          • It is regarding the amount of funds and lack of proof regarding substantiating the goals of the NBN and why those goals were done in the first place (i.e. something a CBA would address)

            Almost all GBE’s (or similar types of government relationships for companies) that rollout infrastructure projects do a CBA before its done. Its done for motorways, roads and even the desalination plant

            So yes, it is still unique

          • Exactly as I predicted. You even brought in the CBA a post earlier that I predicted .

            Well, I challenge you to find a CBA for the now defunk Seaspray Helicopter project? I challenge you to find a CBA for the original Broadband Connect (OPEL) project?

          • The seaspray is hardly comparable, there is no company being involved or setup by the government, it was just a purchase of a helicopter (and not a smart one). You don’t need to do a CBA on that because you are not building anything (where you have to forecast blowouts and costs and whatnot)

            OPEL was seen as necessary and a trivial amount of money (1.9 billion dollars). It was just about delivering wireless and satellite in rural areas that didn’t have a form of internet (or very limited). Furthermore, OPEL involved private industry, it wasn’t a complete government project. There was most likely an internal CBA (governments do CBA’s all the time), its just that it was never (understandably) requested, since it was a trivial amount of money to cover the regional nation.

            You also have to look at the scope of the amount of funds in question, you are not going to do CBA’s on trivial amounts of money

            But in regards to actual infrastructure programs which are government built and funded, a CBA is almost always done. Its done for all the motorways (M2, and the one in brisbane) etc etc and the desal plant. CBA’s are basically a defacto standard for things that need to be built which require non trivial amounts of money

          • The seaspray is hardly comparable, there is no company being involved or setup by the government, it was just a purchase of a helicopter (and not a smart one). You don’t need to do a CBA on that because you are not building anything (where you have to forecast blowouts and costs and whatnot)

            So how come it’s okay for the purchase of a Helicoptor to go mindblowingly wrong, especially when the full cost of the project is commited at outlay, without first doing some form of CBA and it isn’t okay for a project that can be phased out at anytime if it failed, thus reducing the overall cost of the project and saving you from further loses to do this without a CBA? Riddle me this.

            OPEL was seen as necessary and a trivial amount of money (1.9 billion dollars). It was just about delivering wireless and satellite in rural areas that didn’t have a form of internet (or very limited). Furthermore, OPEL involved private industry, it wasn’t a complete government project. There was most likely an internal CBA (governments do CBA’s all the time), its just that it was never (understandably) requested, since it was a trivial amount of money to cover the regional nation.

            And I consider $43 billion to be a trivial amount of money to cover the whole of Australia, you disagree with me I’m sure, and that’s fine, but the point is, who is to define what is “trivial” and what isn’t? And what, you think that because it was a Coalition plan they obviously must have done a CBA because they can do no wrong right? Get off your high horse.

          • So how come it’s okay for the purchase of a Helicoptor to go mindblowingly wrong, especially when the full cost of the project is commited at outlay, without first doing some form of CBA
            1. Amount of funds in question (1billion vs 50 billion)
            2. Scope of project (single purchase versus national scale project)
            3. Risk of blowout (the helicopter had no risk of blowout, its a single purchase for a set price, NBN is a different story). Obvious risks are also labor shortages, so its not just financial/political reasons. Also because of #1, if there was any blowout, it would have been a lot less because of the initial trivial amount of funds

            The above 3 points make the helicopter purchase a trivial but stupid one. The NBN is hardly considered trivial (but is still arguably stupid)

            Mind you, I never said a CBA wasn’t done for the helicopter. CBA’s are a standard practice when doing any of these types of decisions. Whether they are publicly revealed is another matter, since it is a standard, if its a government purchase the CBA’s are often done internally and are never shown unless someone asks for them (i.e. someone has a suspicion of something going wrong, FOI laws etc etc)

            And I consider $43 billion to be a trivial amount of money to cover the whole of Australia
            You are wrong, $50 billion (that is the total cost, which you have to include when taking into account risk) is definitely NOT trivial. The fact that we are spending the most (by multiple factors), per head out of any country in the world (the same reason why EIU put the rating for Australia so low, regardless of whether you agree with them).

            If you did some economic studies, or even common sense, you would realize that 50 billion for a population of 22 million is anything but trivial, its 2-3 more expensive, for example, the the stimulus package for the GFC. The opel covered all of regional australia (basically ~%97 of the country) and was 1.9 billion

            If it was trivial, then it wouldn’t have gotten any attention apart from the people directly involved

            but the point is, who is to define what is “trivial” and what isn’t?
            Do an economics course, or some basic studies in the area. Only the people that don’t know what they are talking about would argue that the NBN is “trivial”, in any sense

          • A two day economics course and now an expert…LOL. Life does NOT revolve around sums from a economics for dummies book, tiger…

            As witnessed graphically on the news this morning… Reports have now surfaced that the Japanese nuclear plants cut safety corners to “save $”. They put $’s ahead of “nuclear safety”, FFS…!

            Yes the fiscally anal in Japan, put an entire country/region in jeopardy, to save a few ****ing $’s! Perhaps it’s time to wake up…!

          • A two day economics course and now an expert…LOL. Life does NOT revolve around sums from a economics for dummies book, tiger…

            If you say so buddy, but since they are spending $50 of government bonds/tax payers money then it does involve economics in every way possible

            Life does not just revolve around technology, you have to take other factors into account (such as economic ones). The NBN, just like the failed darley marling plan, where both plans that only factored in one extreme disciple of science and ignoring everything else, the NBN being technology and the Murray Darling being environment

            Yes the fiscally anal in Japan, put an entire country/region in jeopardy, to save a few ****ing $’s! Perhaps it’s time to wake up…!
            Even though this is one of those pointless, uneducated and stupid rants, could you please explain who Japan was to fiscally prepare against the biggest earthquake in japans history (and the 6th biggest in the history of recorded Earthquakes).

            Also if this is regarding the Nuclear Plants, mind telling me how many people passed away directly due to the plants shutting? As far as I am aware, its a big fat zero, and any radiation exposure to humans has been minor. On the other hand the actual Tsunami and Earthquake, was a totally different story

          • Gee I hit a nerve with old Ego eh…LMAO… truth hurts. Sorry one day economics course!

            Now tell us how the Senate forms government AGAIN…

            When you have a spare “2 seconds”, come and tell “everything you know”…tiger!

          • I read that as an admission of defeat RS, could to see you couldn’t say anything in response

          • Of course you consider it a victory ‘dat ego’… because you have never had a victory (not even a sniff) and never will.

            As such and naturally, even a sarcastic comment from me or me just taking the **ss, at your expense, is considered a victory for you, by you… LOL!

            Keep trying tiger…!

            Ooh you forgot AGAIN… to explain that strange Senate comment of yours…LOL!!!!!

  9. So what you are saying Alain is that governments should not have any foresight beyond the length of their elected term. Scrap any visionary programs designed to have benefit decades into future.

    And then you try to compare government spending to that of the business world. They are very different beasts my friend.

    • “Scrap any visionary programs designed to have benefit decades into future.”

      Well that’s where you and I and many others part company, I don’t see any positive relationship between the NBN rollout funded by taxpayers and that statement in the first place.

    • So what you fail to see is the benefit of having ubiquitous wired connections Australia wide?

      Do you disagree with every benefit listed on the numerous articles and blogs to which you graced with your opinion. Or do you simply ignore them because many of these benefits will take several years to be realised and developed into their full potential?

      At least now I can understand why you fight so vehemently against the NBN. Being as short sighted as you are with relation to the development/consolidation of services that is offered under the current scheme I would imagine that the only benefit you see would be for those downloading pirated movies and adult material.

      Point conceded. If the only benefit I saw was for pirates and perverts then sure, I would be against the NBN as well. I just don’t understand how the potential of the NBN can elude your attention.

      • “So what you fail to see is the benefit of having ubiquitous wired connections Australia wide?’

        No I didn’t say that, I don’t approve of the taxpayers bankrolling billions at a very high investment risk for the construction and the on going administration and maintenance of a national FTTH rollout handing it over to ISP’s and Telco’s who will put their appropriate retail margin on it and sell it back to those very same taxpayers.

        They say there is a sucker born every minute – but that one is a $43 billion classic.

        • Where oh where does the high investment risk come into the picture? The entire project is geared to be a monopoly. As I have previously posted while 50 billion is an immense amount for any one person, it is no longer beyond the scope of governments.

          There has been reports released stating that the NBN is viable and yet you insist to repeat the lie that there is some sort of inherent risk involved. The telecommunications sector makes billions every year and yet This is a poor investment. There are strong links between the provision of high quality broadband within countries and a corresponding increase in GDP, yet you consider this to be financial negligence.

          The only risk involved in the NBN is the lib’s scrapping it at the next election without doing a CBA detailing the negative effects this would have.

          • @Jasmcd

            “Where oh where does the high investment risk come into the picture?”

            You have answered your own question with:

            “As I have previously posted while 50 billion is an immense amount for any one person, it is no longer beyond the scope of governments.”

            It is not beyond the scope of a Government to spend it, Governments love blowing taxpayer funds against the wall, but it is well beyond the scope of them getting a decent return from it, they may have at some point in time in the cloudy future a fixed line monopoly, but they have to convince Telstra and SingTel to shut down their fixed line networks and hand over their customers.

            Telstra is playing extremely hard to get and SingTel is still in its negotiation infancy.

            The NBN requires a 70% uptake to be viable, that’s 70% that sign up for a ISP NBN Plan, not 70% who take the so called ‘free connection’ and then continue using other than NBN BB or telephony for their communication needs.

            70%? I think they are dreaming!

            “There are strong links between the provision of high quality broadband within countries and a corresponding increase in GDP,”

            There is where? and I want strong links to FTTH rollouts on the proposed 100% taxpayer funded $43 billion Australian scale of rollout please.

            “the only risk involved in the NBN is the lib’s scrapping it at the next election without doing a CBA detailing the negative effects this would have.”

            As distinct from the lack of a proper CBA detailing the positive effects it would have you mean?

          • Oh…… its you again Alain…… please stop knocking at my door as I am not going to buy the FUDge you are selling. I think there is a one nation supporter down the street who might have time to listen to you, if you tell them that the NBN will increase the amount of boat people coming to Australia – OR – make people believe in climate change, I am sure they will buy all the FUDge you have.

            OECD have released a report linking broadband access to GDP. Now this isnt the smoking gun that you requested. But I imagine unless Turnbull himself said the NBN was a good idea, you would remain stoich in your anti NBN campaign. Ask yourself why broadband uptake should have any effect on GDP. I mean if you think about it, there is nothing you can do on BB that cant be done on dial up.
            http://www.oecd.org/document/54/0,3343,en_2649_34225_38690102_1_1_1_1,00.html

          • @Jasmcd

            “h…… its you again Alain……,

            <<<>>>

            “I am sure they will buy all the FUDge you have”.

            More no fact emotive rant stocking filler, I am so happy you got that off your chest.

            “OECD have released a report linking broadband access to GDP. Now this isnt the smoking gun that you requested.”

            No as you rightly concluded it isn’t so why quote it?

            “But I imagine unless Turnbull himself said the NBN was a good idea, you would remain stoich in your anti NBN campaign.”

            Well you imagine wrong, I can make up my own mind on the NBN thanks, I know you find it hard to comprehend but it is possible to hold a totally objective and independent view.

            ” Ask yourself why broadband uptake should have any effect on GDP. I mean if you think about it, there is nothing you can do on BB that cant be done on dial up.”

            Oh so we are back to crystal ball gazing again, it’s never far away in the pro-NBN spin machine.

        • Sent from my wireless device (iPhone), connected through my ADSL2 wifi. So please, stop quoting the adoption of wireless services as the death knell for Fibre.

          • yeah that as well, I have my phone setup to turn its wifi on when I get home so I can utilise my adsl2 connection on the phone as its so much more reliable

          • Alain, always the comedian. At least I would be laughing if I knew you weren’t serious.

            Yes ADSL2 can meet all of todays needs for the average home. I am an average user. For the news I read, the email I check and odd game of scrabble I play what I have now is fine. There are many possible uses I could get from better bandwidth. Could I live without these benefits? Sure. But I could also live without power, water and sewerage connected to my property, but that does not mean that populations would find that acceptable in this day and age.

            Yet again you fail to realise the true purposes of the NBN.

            At least you provide entertainment in the form of your short sighted outlook.

            (RS, you also provide entertainment, but in the form of your lack of patience for FUDsters such as… what do you call him again?????)

          • Hi Jasmcd, I assume we are talking about our friend [sic] elaine aka Mr. Contradiction…! As he does so constantly…!

            He also posts elsewhere as advocate, just to be a sneaky FUDster and to falsely exaggerate FUD numbers.

            Ooh, thanks for noticing my facetious frivolity with those sans cerebral activity… such as our friend [sic] above and his FUD clone “dat ego”.

          • @Jasmcd

            “Could I live without these benefits? Sure. But I could also live without power, water and sewerage connected to my property, but that does not mean that populations would find that acceptable in this day and age.”

            NBN FTTH does not equal power, water and sewage, in the same way HFC cable does not equal power, water and sewage, and in the same way ADSL2+ does not equal power, water and sewage.

            Your analogy is seriously flawed.

            “Yet again you fail to realise the true purposes of the NBN.”

            You left that one hanging with a blank line following it, is that meaningful?

          • Gee WRONG again… elaine (at least you are consistent, if nothing else)…

            There’s a worldwide push from the UN to make internet access a “basic human right”! In fact some countries in Europe have already done so … DO YOU UNDERSTAND…?

            Your biased absolute hatred of the NBN (which still goes unanswered as to why – but you have never refuted my guess, employer/wallet/political) and your lack of vision/lack of compassion for your fellow human beings and their needs (just because they differ to you) is pitifully repugnant…!

  10. Would it be too much to ask the posters who snipe repeatedly at each other without any relevant contribution to the discussion to have those posts suppressed?

    Who cares where people work – we all need good communications, and most of us are doing it tough economically, and the NBN will solve both those problems. Wherever there is fibre there will be Wi-Fi, so it delivers near-universal low-cost mobility, too.

    Mister Turnbull saying that the NBN will never be completed is like saying the same about roads. You can always do more, but all large towns will get fibre by the early 2020s, and wireless is going to reach more and more with better technologies, including some niche techniques like CSIRO’s Ngara for very low density remote areas to get something with lower latency than satellite.

    • As good as the promise of Ngara is – (I think it’s super exciting) – it’ll take some time before it gets ratified and cleared by way of regulatory approval.

      It would be a good five years from mainstream.

      • So it could be out there before the NBN is finished or cancelled whatever comes first and crucial decisions from the two biggest Telco’s, Telstra and Optus about the degree and timing of their ‘NBN co-operation’?

        :)

  11. Wow. Turnbull making comments against the NBN? Shocking…
    The reality is NBN is our future.
    A wireless network as suggested by Turnbull would literally require a tower on every street corner to achieve the speeds they want.
    Is that really viable? Is that really what the population wants?
    I also would like to meet the people that don’t want the NBN. I’ve never met any that do.

    • @Cookie

      “The reality is NBN is our future.”

      Really? so those areas of Australia that already have FTTH and have had it for years are the higher socio-economic areas while those that don’t have it and have to ‘struggle’ on with crappy ADSL2+ or HFC or -gasp- wireless are really finding it hard to cope are they?

      I hope you don’t think ‘our future’ is singularly tied to a IPTV and movie downloads service to multiple points in the home.

      “A wireless network as suggested by Turnbull would literally require a tower on every street corner to achieve the speeds they want.”

      He is not suggesting a wireless service instead of a fibre service.

      “Is that really viable?”

      No, because that’s not what he is suggesting.

      “I also would like to meet the people that don’t want the NBN. I’ve never met any that do.”

      Oh well that Cookie statistical sample seals it then, you have convinced me, the NBN can go ahead. LOL

  12. The fact that there are people in this country that are actually arguing against the NBN just shows how completely backward this nation and its people are. Looking back on just how many things this country and its government has wasted money on and then the one really useful infrastructure project that would serve everyone is slammed by the gasping masses.

    Sometimes I am embarrassed to call myself an Australian.

    • “Looking back on just how many things this country and its government has wasted money on and then the one really useful infrastructure project that would serve everyone”

      Interesting you make the point that the Government wastes money, but you have decided this one is NOT a waste of money before it is even finished.

      “that would serve everyone is slammed by the gasping masses.”

      Well I wouldn’t call some comments by posters in tech geek web sites like this as any indication of ‘slamming by the gasping masses’.

      • Interesting that we used to refer to the English as pommie whingers.

        Yet here are 100’s of 1000’s in the UK protesting about government “spending cuts”, whilst some with questionable ethics, morals and agendas, here in Oz, forever whinge about the fact that our government has “wasted” money…

        Wasted on stimulus cheques for battling Aussies, free insulation, subsidies on solar appliances, BER, lap tops to help with kids educations and let’s not forget the NBN. How dare they… we’d much rather spending cuts…OMG!

        Hmmm, I know which scenario I’d prefer and as such, perhaps it’s time for the FUDsters to wake up to themselves…!

        • @RS

          With all due respect you are suffering from IDS: ‘infinite debt syndrome’: where you think you can keep borrowing more and more without ever thinking that one day you have to pay it all back.

          The USA *was* suffering from IDS as were many Western European countries. The GFC was the first ‘tremor’ that shocked people into realizing that the days of IDS sufferers are limited. Since Kevin07 came to power Australia has started to contract IDS.

          Ireland can’t pay its debt. The US soon has to raise the ceiling on their borrowing ‘limit’ (I use that word loosely). The US is printing currency to inject into the economy – which gives short term gain as it inflates the value of their overseas debt as investors flee the currency, devaluing it. Greece is a basket case (BTW they have a government funded FTTP rollout plan – currently on hold oddly enough ;) ). Portugal’s debt is spiraling out of control.

          In this financial climate you seriously can’t pass off people who are pushing for rational, responsible spending and reducing debt rather than expanding it with a $43b x2 x3 ? NBN as FUDsters. Especially when high speed BB could be delivered much more quickly and at a massive cost saving and with mostly private investment via FTTN

          Instead you would seriously have to question the motivation or intelligence of the people saying “borrow more money” as everywhere we look we see how the rest of the world is suffering from IDS (‘infinite debt syndrome’).

          The ‘tsunami of reality’ is on its way after the GFC earthquake and it will hit all those suffering IDS.

  13. We give 10 billion away in negative gearing every year and we are squabbling over an infrastructure project that will add 1-2% to the economy at least every year and will get paid back in 5-10 years.

    When will people stop thinking about themselves and start thinking about the greater good.

    Business’ are screaming for the nbn (most of them can only get adsl at $1000’s a month!).

    If you don’t want the nbn that’s fine, however don’t ruin it for the rest of us.

  14. Turnbull is such a dope, honestly.
    Typical old people views of technology just like that dried up crumpet howard did who he sold of Telstra.
    “hey lets get private enterprise to do it” – how many times have we heard that from the government only to be bent of the barrel and ass raped.

  15. Jason – it was people like you who were whinging about Telstra being sluggish and providing crap service when it was government owned. Trust me – their service has improved 1000000% since before when they had no competition to worry about. The gov now proposes to build a new government owned monopoly, the NBN, essentially going back to the bad old days of a government owned Telstra… and so the circle completes…

    what are they going to do next, create a government owned bank to compete with the Commonwealth Bank that Labor sold?

Comments are closed.