Optus’ NBN plans: The most intelligent so far

106

Note: This article initially incorrectly stated Optus was the only provider not to force customers to take a telephony service alongside their NBN connection. This was incorrect: Several providers — notably Primus and Internode, do offer plans without a bundled telephone line. However, Optus is the first ISP to promote this as a ‘Naked’ offering similar to Naked DSL plans.

opinion Well, colour me extremely surprised. Optus’ National Broadband Network plans released today are among the best so far, and represent a level of innovative thinking about the next-generation infrastructure that has so far been missing from all previous NBN commercial pricing options.

As I’ve previously written, the NBN pricing plans released so far by major Australian ISPs like Internode, iiNet, Exetel and Primus have been quite disappointing.

Sure, the ISPs’ pricing options have been broadly satisfactory in terms of the raw prices which customers will pay to access the predominantly fibre infrastructure as it’s rolled out around the nation over the next decade. There have been low-end deals cheap enough to satisfy even the most aggrieved Coalition MP. There have been stellar mid-range options to satisfy the mainstream. And there have been decently priced top-range plans for mega-downloaders.

However, the problem with all of the NBN plans released so far is that they’ve been trapped in the previous paradigm gradually evolved for the current generation of copper-based ADSL infrastructure. Insufficient quota limits which could be breezed through in a few days of hard downloading, unfair shaping speeds and compulsory fixed telephone lines which many customers will never use; all of these idiotic ideas have been ported wholesale from the world of ADSL broadband.

And when the odd innovative idea has popped up — such as Exetel chief John Linton’s proposal to charge on a pure usage model — it quickly gets squashed.

It is because of the ongoing frustration I have had with previous NBN pricing plans that I am so enthused by the launch of Optus’ commercial options this morning. The telco has introduced a number of ideas into the NBN pricing paradigm that reflect fresh thinking on the issue — and a desire to part with many of the mistakes of the past.

Let us count the firsts contained in Optus’ announcement this morning.

Firstly, and most critically, the telco today became the first NBN provider to explicitly and up-front promote a broadband plan without a bundled telephone line, in what is one of Australia’s first “Naked NBN” plans. The significance of this cannot be overstated.

Right now, there are hundreds of thousands of Australians who have already signed up for Naked DSL, starkly demonstrating their desire to avoid having a fixed telephone line at home. Most of these people probably use a combination of their mobile phone and a (often free) Internet telephony line to make all of their calls. They do not want or need to use or pay line rental for a traditional telephone line.

The attempt by every major ISP apart from Optus (edit: It looks like Primus, Internode and perhaps iiNet may be doing this as well, but it’s not as obvious in these cases) to bring these people back into the analogue telephony world has been nothing short of an extortionate attempt to bundle additional charges on top of a basic broadband connection. Voice, in an NBN world, will be a commodity, and the concept of line rental irrelevant.

Secondly, Optus today became the first NBN provider to do away with the pathetic 12Mbps entry level speeds which NBN Co is offering (except on Optus’ most basic plan) and standardise instead on 25Mbps speeds. Unlike all of its competitors, Optus will charge users nothing extra for 25Mbps speeds. You just get it as part of your package. And, sensibly, you’ll only need to pay an extra $10 or $20 extra per month to get 50Mbps or 100Mbps speeds. It’s that simple.

Lastly, Optus today became the first provider to bundle mobile plans with its NBN options.

Sure, the company’s offer is pretty pathetic, and we expect Telstra to easily beat it when the big T launches its own plans, but we’re not sneezing at $10 off our broadband plan if we’ve got a mobile plan with the same provider. And, with companies like iiNet and Exetel already selling some mobile offerings, there is simply no reason why they couldn’t have done what Optus did and bundle them into their NBN plans.

They just didn’t bother.

Now, don’t get me wrong — this morning’s Optus revelations aren’t all roses. The company’s prices are broadly more expensive than those of several of its rivals (a $129 terabyte plan at 50Mbps, with a bundled phone line? No thanks, we’ll take iiNet’s for $99.95 per month), the company still shapes speeds down to 256kbps, has re-implemented artificial on- and off-peak quota divisions and it doesn’t seem to be offering its FetchTV service as an additional bundle. However, these are problems which by and large aren’t unique to Optus — most of the other NBN providers also suffer from some or all of these annoyances. Optus is not alone in its faults.

In addition, we really hate how Optus has avoided actually stating the actual speeds which users will achieve under its planning, choosing instead to label them with a series of nausea-inducing marketing doublespeak terms such as ‘Stay Connected’ for 12Mbps, ‘Social’ for 25Mbps, ‘Multimedia’ for 50Mbps and ‘Multimedia eXtream’ for 100Mbps. And we’re also suspicious of the telco’s labelling of data quotas as “Up to 40GB”, “Up to 120GB” and so on. What does “up to” actually mean? We’re betting it means “Up to whatever the hell Optus says it means” — as defined by an odious and overly complicated standard usage agreement, which nobody outside of the company’s gigantic legal team will ever be able to completely interpret.

However, at least Optus is thinking outside of the box, and playing to its strengths in bundling and mobile access provision. And that is a damn sight more than all of the other NBN providers so far can say.

Kudos must go today to the team at Optus for some innovative offerings. Perhaps there’s some life in the old dog yet.

106 COMMENTS

  1. I’m guessing ‘up to 40GB’ means that if you go over your alotted quota for either peak or off-peak, your entire connection gets shaped… they got in trouble for this recently and had to add the ‘up to’… right?

    • Hmm quite possibly that is what it means. Either way it sounds like doubletalk to me. Either you get 40GB or you don’t. There shouldn’t be these ephemeral “up to” qualifications.

    • Don’t know why the 500GB/1000GB bundled plans have it as “Up to” since there is no peak/offpeak, but on the naked plans the small print says once peak or total data is used.

      So it will be the same as now, where if you use all your peak then you’re capped for both times (and lose whatever offpeak you had left), but if you use all your offpeak first then you start working on your peak instead, and once that’s gone (ie. all data) then you’re capped.

  2. I will never sign up for NBN with a company that insists on voluntarily filtering material on a secret blacklist, irrespective of how affordable their plans are.

    Hoping an ISP with integrity and common sense matches these plans in terms of value.

    • Daniel, I wish we could compete more closely to the Optus plans. Unfortunately, as it is we only make a few $ on each of our published plans. Its hard as a small ISP to compete with the big boys, and somewhat silly to try. But i can tell you the difference is always in the support level, small wins hands down.

      And as for the main point in your comment “voluntarily filtering material on a secret blacklist’ I’m a freedom of anything and everything person, id rather close shop than filter/BigBorther the Internet i sell.

  3. “up to” no way I am signing up for this until exactly what up to means is made clear.

  4. What are you talking about?

    “in what is Australia’s first “Naked NBN” plan”
    Internode and Exetel include a basic VoIP service with a DID
    iiNet doesn’t if you want it you have to pay an extra $10 a month (but theres no penalty or benefit for doing so)
    Primus has bundled and non-bundled NBN plans

    “Unlike all of its competitors, Optus will charge users nothing extra for 25Mbps speeds.”
    Not having a 12Mb service doesn’t equate to not charging extra for 25Mb

    “you’ll only need to pay an extra $10 or $20 extra per month to get 50Mbps or 100Mbps speeds”
    Kind of like iiNet’s plan to charge an extra $10 for 50Mb or $15 for 100Mb speeds (above 25Mb pricing)

    “And, with companies like iiNet and Exetel already selling some mobile offerings, there is simply no reason why they couldn’t have done what Optus did and bundle them into their NBN plans.”
    Ummm…. firstly Primus also sells mobile plans secondly you can basically consider iiNet’s plans a bundle with their broadband since the only way you can sign up for them is to be a broadband customer or Exetel who discount their mobile plan when bundled with a broadband service

    • OK, let’s go through these points.

      1. Voice

      I don’t class Internode and Exetel’s NBN plans as naked, because they come with compulsory VoIP. What if you don’t want a phone line? Too bad. With iiNet it’s not precisely clear, although from they don’t currently offer naked DSL without VoIP, and their NBN plan page seems to imply it’s included as well. It doesn’t precisely say, but it doesn’t not say as well. I’m a long-time iiNet customer and they haven’t had non-VoIP bundling for a while now.

      Looking at Primus’ site, you could be right on that one — the company has bundled plans and normal plans. I didn’t think they had unbundled. I may have to modify the article for that one. However, they still charge you $10 extra for a service without a voice line, which I don’t think is precisely fair. Of course, Optus charges you extra as well, so it’s unfair all around.

      2. 25Mbps

      Optus’ 25Mbps plans are competitive with Internode’s 25Mbps plans, which are hardly the cheapest of the lot. I’d say Optus is doing Australia a favour by skipping 12Mbps.

      3. You’re right — iiNet does have the feature of paying a little extra for higher speeds. But I didn’t say they didn’t.

      4. None of the other ISPs are explicitly bundling mobile like Optus is. I stand by that point.

      • “With iiNet it’s not precisely clear, although from they don’t currently offer naked DSL without VoIP, and their NBN plan page seems to imply it’s included as well.”

        maybe you need better glasses then. I’ve been looking at them, because soon i may be on them. I had to strain to FIND the phone. Its not included. You cant find it on there, because its NOT THERE. Its got a tiny little blurb about being an option.

        Once again, disappointing article with facts not correct

      • “I don’t class Internode and Exetel’s NBN plans as naked, because they come with compulsory VoIP.”

        Internode don’t compulsorily bundle VoIP on NBN plans. They did on their initially released plans, but not on the current ones – which I am hoping are what you are comparing to Optus’ current plans.

        • I don’t know about Internode, but Exetel’s VoIP is not “compulsary”… it’s simply a free inclusion with every Exetel broadband plan. (not including call costs of course)

          If any customer doesn’t want it, they simply don’t activate it.

          I have an Exetel ADSL2 plan and also an Exetel Wireless broadband plan, so I’m entitled to 2 x free VoIP plans. (each with an included DID at no charge)

          But I’ve chosen to use engin instead, so my 2 x Exetel VoIP plans go unused. In the years that I’ve been an Exetel customer, there has never been any “compulsion” to activate or use them.

  5. “Firstly, and most critically, the telco today became the first NBN provider to explicitly and up-front promote a broadband plan without a bundled telephone line, in what is one of Australia’s first “Naked NBN” plans. The significance of this cannot be overstated.’

    Well, shouldn’t that ‘honor’ go to the Actual ISP that was the first to offer unbundled voice / naked NBN plans..

    Nuskope released its NBN plans last week, without a bundled telephone line.

    • Sorry mate — never heard of NuSkope — and I’ve been covering the telco sector in Australia for many decades now. I take your point, however.

  6. Another dodgy NBN article…

    First you say there’s been no creativity, then you applaud Optus for offering the type of plan that has been available for years.

    Inherent in that argument is a complaint about bundling, but you then go on to support a different type of bundle option in mobile plans.

    Then you praise the decision not to offer a basic 12mbit plan in favour of starting with a higher priced product.

    Claiming… “Optus will charge users nothing extra for 25Mbps speeds.” …is pure spin, how can you claim you aren’t paying extra when it doesn’t have another option to compare it to. If you could buy half the bandwidth, it would certainly be cheaper. Further research would find such an option will exist and will be cheaper. Completely refuting your “nothing extra” claim, and also bringing into question your fact checking abilities. The most baffling part being later in the very same article where you do mention the “stay connected” 12mbit plan. How can you be reporting something while simultaneously claiming it doesn’t exist?

    At this point the flattery and excuses make you sound like an Optus shareholder protecting his investment, but you then go on to complain about their prices, peak/off-peak, etc. leaving the whole attempted article a muddled mess of contradictions, unless of course these concessions are merely a red herring to throw people off the scent, and gain yourself some credibility. It appears this could be the case you when you forgive Optus for their flaws because most of the competition are no better.

    And finally I can’t let this comment slide.

    “There have been low-end deals cheap enough to satisfy even the most aggrieved Coalition MP. ”

    Actually there haven’t been, they hadn’t even convinced an independent such as myself. The cheapest option has remained naked ADSL 2+. The cheapest equivalent NBN plan to date matches it, but it isn’t naked, meaning you get stung for a phone you probably don’t want or need and pay more to get the same service.

    But now there is one plan that offers a cheaper option. The offering that you can’t seem to decide whether or not it actually exists. Optus’ new 12Mb plan. This plan finally brings NBN pricing back to reality for the average user. Assuming it does eventuate, and/or others match it, and prices don’t rise excessively, low end users (the vast majority) will now be able to avoid going backwards in the cost of living struggle.

  7. Cool I can’t wait to get rid of telstra… There’ve been ripping me and everyone off for years now… YES!!!

  8. quote “Secondly, Optus today became the first NBN provider to do away with the pathetic 12Mbps entry level speeds”

    That statement is pretty insulting to those who will have no choice under the NBN… By that I mean those that will be put on wireless and satellite when 12mbps is the one and only choice of speeds for them…

    • How is calling 12mbps pathetic insulting to those that will be on wireless and satellite? “12mbps is pathetic” that says nothing about the people on that speed.

    • As I understand it, the wireless “12 megabits” is a minimum wireless speed. I don’t think it is the stated maximum you will receive, merely the minimum target (for everyone)

      • 12Mbps is very easy over wireless technology.
        As proven in speedtest.net historical records, Our customers have the ‘on average’ fastest Internet in South Australia.
        We have been doing ‘trials’ over our network for the past three months, in preparation for our 24 / 2 Mbps wireless product. during the trials, we have seen customers, (2-3 on same AP at same time) pull 50 / 5Mbps. Now I’m not saying thats possible in a ‘over subscripted service’ but with proper network management, and the eventual release of some more radio space form the ACMA i think youll fund that wireless (at least ours) will rival most NBN plans, in speed and $ value.

        (we have wireless Back-haul, using similar equipment to what we give to customers that pumps 190mbps, if we had more spectrum to use……….. and if bandwidth in Aust was cheaper…lol.

        • NuSkope, over what range were your wireless customers getting these speeds? NBNCo’s intention is to guarantee (subject to electromagnetic interference, etc) 12 Mbps out to a 7km radius, or at 14 km radius with a rooftop fixed mast. As you know, at 7km, the signal strength is only 2% (1/49) that received at a 1 km radius. At 14 km it is only 0.5% (1/196).

          To those critical of outlying premises getting 12 Mbps, please remember that they are currently on dialup or satellite at a tiny fraction of that bandwidth. The 93rd percentile of fibre recipients are already quite expensive to connect, though cheaper than provisioning mobile towers to get to them. Undoubtedly, wireless technology will continue to improve, as NuSkope also suggests, and there will also be many cases where premises originally thought economically unreachable by NBNCo fibre will actually be able to get it, e.g. by reallocation of a year’s worth of satellite subsidy, business decisions to fund the extra cost, etc. NBNCo already actively engages local communities to find was to do exactly this.

    • I’m not so sure about iiNet’s plans. Currently on ADSL, you pay the same $9.95 for an extra phone line — but it’s compulsory. I don’t think iiNet has clearly stipulated whether the same will be true in an NBN world. In any event, they’re not marketing ‘naked’ and ‘bundled’ plans.

      • “I’m not so sure about iiNet’s plans. Currently on ADSL”

        Gee, i thought an experienced blogger like yourself would compare NBN plans with, well, NBN plans. Not adsl.
        The article isnt very good, and you are just digging a deeper hole for yourself now.

        • oh, forgot to mention. what compulsory 9.95 phone charge with adsl? Again, you are just simply WRONG. Instead of pulling facts and figures out of your nether region, try actually checking your facts first.

          • “Netphone2 … costs an extra $9.95 per month”
            “Bundle netphone for $9.95 and get all your local and national calls”

            It’s pretty clear, it doesn’t say “net phone is bundled for $9.95”, and it says net phone costs are “extra” It doesn’t matter what DSL does. If you are forced to buy it then it would be included in the main cost. The plans were also discussed on whirlpool.

            If you need to work it out though to make it clear, $49.95 plan * 24 = $1198.80, which matches the stated minimum cost over 24 months. No $9.95 included.

  9. Why not put Foxtel & TV on the NBN to eliminate the hastle of getting another cable/satellite connection ?Radio as well . In 20 years all those transmitters with 50,000 watts of power consumption can be pulled down & we could get everything thru one wire ! Radio thru mobile phone towers could be an interim method & that would be the new car radio .A way to broaden the take up ?

    • From what I understand there is plans to put multicast TV streams onto the NBN, that’s going to be a bit further down the line though.

      And of course it won’t be ISP dependent, it’ll just be build to a spare port on your NBN box and treated as a separate service, much like how cable internet and cable TV are treated separately.

        • alain, you haven’t been paying much attention, have you. The ONT has four data ports. A consumer can receive up to four separate services, or can ask NBNCo to install one extra ONT from the outset if they know they need more.

          Most people will take a single internet service and do everything with it.

          But a housebound person or post-operative patient might receive an additional service from a health provider, such as a home consultation device with BP/cardio sensors and a video screen. This is likely to be covered by Medicare or health insurers because of the flexibility it provides for consultation times and the massive cost savings in not having to transport or accommodate patients in hospital for basic daily monitoring.

          There might be also corporate, government or dedicated PayTV devices that might use an independent service on one of the three spare ports of the ONT. Details of the equipment are available at nbnco.com.au

  10. Hey everyone, FYI I got the ‘Naked NBN’ part about unbundling telephony services wrong, and have corrected the article as a result. My apologies.

  11. What does “up to” actually mean?

    In my dealings with Optus – when I queried why my “down to” shaping wasnt consistent with my ADSL loss (because of distance to exchange) the guy there tried to interpret “down to” as “down up to”

    Unfortunately ISP many contracts are 24months – which is often twice the warranty of the hardware these days – so i say “caveat emptor” or buyer beware… if your not prepared to read the contract go casual with someone like Internode – it works out the best value in the long run. Not many regret joining Internode.

    I for one normally have 2 x ADSL lines coming in for redundancy. Internode is my primary and I’ve tried about 10 as my backups. Problem is during that time Im constantly pulling my hair out with the backup providers whilst my primary line Internode keeps ticking away.

    The only time I had a problem with Internode I rang support – they told me the problem was their end. Dont touch your settings, it will come good in an hour. So I went to the pub. !!

    You get what you pay for. Internode might charge 5% more but you get more than double the bang for your buck.

    Question: How do you tell a ‘geek’ from an opinionated wanker… they use Internode (of course)

    • Is that really you Simon ;)
      Another Node fanboi who’s claim to fame is that if your not with Internode than the sky is falling.
      Honestly, you need to get your hand of it and your plush pony and realise that Node aren’t the end all and be all of ISPs.
      For a company that boldly boasts how great their network is nationally and internationally, how is the path to China these days ;)
      Just another one who can’t see the forest for the trees.

      Cheers

    • @SEO-Adelaide

      “Not many regret joining Internode. ‘

      Well if they do and they have the audacity to post their grievances in the Internode forum in Whirlpool they are howled down by the 24/7 patrolling fanclub or more often than not just deleted out by moderators under the convenient excuse of being ‘pointless’.

      Of course praising Internode ad nauseum is never ‘pointless’.

  12. $60 for 50GB peak. BIG WHOOP! I currently pay $50 ($10 less) for UNLIMITED downloads at ADSL2 speeds (which is more than enough) – and I get to keep my phone line – with NO contract term with an ISP. And if I *was* prepared to take up a contract, I could go to another ISP and get UNLIMITED downloads (day OR night) for just $40 a month!

    Seriously, what scum Australian politicians are – and what sheeple the Australian public is – for taking up the NBN! Stand up you bunch of goobers, refuse to use the NBN, demand your copper phone lines don’t get ripped out of the ground, keep your old internet connection and phone line, and thus KEEP YOUR PRIVACY. (Because once every databit goes through a government-owned network, you LOSE the last bit of privacy you had left.)

    Oh – and this is not an anti-Labor post either, because the Liberals are just as bad – offering wireless as a solution – what a joke. No privacy THERE either! At least with the NBN, only government goons can monitor your internet habits. With wireless though, anyone with a search engine can learn to access your internet traffic!

    LOOK IT UP SHEEPLE – BAAA!!!

    • Anyone who thinks copper lines are somehow more private or secure than fibre needs to hit the books and educate themselves. I might add that the government owning/operating the CAN does not making it any easier or harder to spy on citizens’ online activities, if that’s what they want to do. If this is something you worry about your precious copper won’t save you; strong encryption is what you need. It wouldn’t hurt to fashion a hat out of tinfoil while you’re at it.

      Also, using a “search engine” to intercept wireless network traffic? ROFL!

    • Hi Greg,

      Pricing is an argument I admit has some merit. I’ll give you that. But I will ask if the ISP you currently get unlimited downloads off (or the “other” one) has announced any NBN pricing yet? If not, perhaps we should wait to compare their plans with their own plans. Remember, every ISP operates differently, with different contention ratios and different end-goals for the customer in terms of available bandwidth.

      One common complaint with a well-known unlimited internet provider TPG is that the internet slows down considerably during peak times. In a fibre world. where all customers receive their stated speed (12/25/50/100) it may not be possible to allow unlimited downloads without more investment in ISP networks. (but we are yet to see plan pricing from TPG).

      To your other points, I have a few questions.
      How fast is your sync speed?
      Can everyone get that sync speed?
      What proportion of people do you estimate can access that internet speed?
      Whose infrastructure are you on?
      Is that company part-owned by the government? (Is it part-owned by a different government?)
      Does that company sniff your internet traffic? (how do you know?)
      Why do you think the government will have even more access to NBNCo assets, than Telstra assets.
      You do realise that if the government (law enforcement) wanted to stiff your internet they could get a court order (given enough proof of wrong-doing before hand) regardless of who you buy internet off. (get this, they don’t even need to tell you!)
      How much do you estimate it will cost to maintain the copper network? (What about past the next 10 years?)

      Greg, I think you will find this is not an issue of privacy. As it is the current system is potentially worse for your privacy. (I could get a box out, attach it to the outside of the copper wire telephone cord coming into your house and intercept all your traffic – telephone and internet. Because copper uses electrons, the movement of those electrons cause an electric field which can be detected. The full content of your communication can be eavesdropped upon by anyone with the intent/technology/knowhow.

      A fibre however uses photons to transmit the information down a glass/plastic tube. It is not susceptible to this kind of interception. You can only intercept the signal where it terminates at the NTU (somewhere in/on your house), and at the telephone exchange.

      • A fibre however uses photons to transmit the information down a glass/plastic tube. It is not susceptible to this kind of interception. You can only intercept the signal where it terminates at the NTU (somewhere in/on your house), and at the telephone exchange.

        On a single mode single wave cable you can, just cause a sharp loop in the cable and a portion of the light diffracts out of it.

        Of course this isn’t applicable on the DWDM or GPON systems, and for interception government agencies would work with the telcos, just like they do today.

    • “because the Liberals are just as bad – offering wireless as a solution – what a joke.”

      Well it would if they did offer it as a solution, they have not, the joke is on you.

      • Alain, you need to read/ get out more.

        Turnbull’s solution is basically OPEL++; more of the same thing. That includes wireless as part of the policy.

        • The NBN plan includes wireless, what is it about the Coalition plan that is ‘more’ wireless’ than the NBN?

        • Can you please outline to me where the coalition have stated they would put wireless around the country

          • Yes I thought it smacked of the multiple banned one Pepe irrational diversionary political BS waffle theme, I was right.

          • TONY ABBOTT:

            *Look, obviously broadband services are going to be incredibly important for our future.*

            CORRECT DEMUNDO

            *I think, though, that the best result is much more likely to be achieved by competitive markets than by a government monopoly*

            CORRECT DEMUNDO

            *and, sure, high speed fibre is very, very important but most of the people who you see making use of these services at the moment are doing it via wireless technology. I mean, all of the people who are using their Blackberry’s or their Iphones for Facebook. All of the people who are sitting in cafes and hotel rooms doing their work, they’re all using wireless technology and we shouldn’t assume that the ONLY way of the future is high speed cable.*

            CORRECT DEMUNDO

            *Well, I’m not sure that we should assume that just because wireless is today slower than fibre cable that it’s always going to be slower than [what we need in accessing] fibre cable*

            CORRECT DEMUNDO

            *and even if we could get 100 megabits or more here our speeds are still limited by the connectivity of the sites that we’re using and apparently some 70 per cent of the sites that Australian’s use are hosted overseas, so they’re dependent upon more than just our own broadband.*

            CORRECT DEMUNDO

            Jesus H. Christ, after all the rubbishing he’s received in tech forums…. this guy actually knows what he’s talking about. he’s been too modest about his solid grasp of the issues.

            thanks for proving that.

            it also appears the general public is cogniscent as well since the Liberals will romp home in 2013 according to the latest political opinion polls.

          • “*and even if we could get 100 megabits or more here our speeds are still limited by the connectivity of the sites that we’re using and apparently some 70 per cent of the sites that Australian’s use are hosted overseas, so they’re dependent upon more than just our own broadband.*”

            This is nonsense, we are fast approaching 20 terabits of international capacity with used capacity measured in the hundreds of gigabits, we have mountains of capacity simply sitting there waiting to be used, we also have another 5-10 terabits coming online within the next 5 years and a second cable out of Perth which will help improve connectivity into Asia (which is already pretty good thanks to SMW, PPC1 and AJC)

            If he is talking about the actual sources, I feel again it is a total non issue – bandwidth in USA and Europe is cheap as chips, as low as $1 per megabit for unmetred connectivity straight into a reputable carrier – in most cases servers hosting popular stuff will be hanging off a 10Gbps unmetred connection at minimum, some will even have a cluster of load balanced servers hanging off several 10Gbps connections.

            The reason many people report poor speeds overseas is because their ISP is not purchasing enough international capacity, it is more than possible to pull 20-30 megabits internationally with one single thread if you are on a good ISP.

            Even on TPG corporate connections that are without doubt oversold I have seen as high as 80 megabits to NZ, 20 megabits to Tokyo, and 15 megabits to USA – Telstra corporate connections no doubt blow that out of the water.

            The bottleneck is the last mile copper, not the international or even inter state back haul.

          • *The bottleneck is the last mile copper, not the international or even inter state back haul.*

            the average d/l is <20GB/mth. if all of TPG customers triple or quadruple their monthly traffic, it won't cost TPG an extra cent in terms of the copper tail circuit (flat ULL charge per connection).

            however, it will result in massive traffic congestion for TPG in their international links. as a result, TPG will have to hike their internet plan pricing to preserve their razor thin margins.

            iiNet's subscribers in Perth are capable of getting 11Mbit (sustained) on average. however, the cost of provisioning 11Mbit of uncontended international bandwidth per customer would be ridiculously prohibitive.

            the "bottleneck" is effectively in the international links and not in the copper tail.

          • I agree provisioning 11Mbit uncontended would be very expensive, but noone is suggesting uncontended connectivity needs to be provisioned.

            In regards to TPG’s international traffic requirements, remember that they own their own 2tb/s cable to Guam, which can then travel onwards to USA via Seattle or Honolulu, this introduces another 20-30ms of latency, but if it came to it TPG could simply route all of their international data out of Guam and pay very little for it.

            In my opinion however a bottleneck is something that is a total prevention, it does not matter what ISP you are with if your copper tail only gives you 4 megabits that is all you will get – on the other hand if you have a 20 megabit copper tail, you can pay slightly more and go with, say, Telstra or Internode and get access to much faster international connectivity.

          • *however, it will result in massive traffic congestion for TPG in their international links. as a result, TPG will have to hike their internet plan pricing to preserve their razor thin margins*

            TPG already have massive congestion in their international links and you don’t see them doing anything about it now. Congrats on choosing one of the ISPs who cronicly underprovision. There are other ISP who don’t have international congestion.

  13. “Optus today became the first NBN provider to do away with the pathetic 12Mbps entry level speeds”

    According to the latest Whirlpool Broadband Survey, the majority of ADSL users currently get under 12Mbps, so it is a fair starting point for those who don’t need the extra speed.

    I currently get 3Mbps. 12Mbps would be 4 times my current speed so to me it’d hardly be considered “pathetic”.

    However I don’t this it will be long before 12Mbps becomes a thing of the past.

    • Remember when Telstra announced the 256K and 512 K Fraudband offerings. Then capped the lot off with a miniscule 1.5Meg top out speed. Seems the NBN is a little bit of history repeating. I say Australia is well and truly stuck in a rut.

  14. Shows how cynical the consumer market is now with Corporate offerings. After all the advertising hype and the hidden and “implied” caveats in any and every contract, that even here it is asked what the “Up to” means. I would take that as the fact that Consumers have no confidence at all in any form of honesty in business now days. Very damning indeed.

  15. Im not sure I totally agree with you in respect to the importance of Naked plans. Naked is a term that evolved on DSL lines and it does not have particular relevance to a NBN world. Voice is just data, albeit prioritised, on the NBN. In the DSL world, naked was just a way of avoiding the standard charge model that had evolved in a system designed around POTS.
    I think using the term ‘Naked’ is a bit misleading. I can see why they are doing it, but its not really correct.

    • I agree with you Chris, the term Naked is associated with ADSL specifically a resold Telstra ULL service (no dial tone no voice) as distinct from the bog standard Telstra PSTN service.

      To apply the description Naked to FTTH is weird and confusing to say the least as indicated by the posts above.

      • Price wise I would agree with you alain. Calling FTTH “Naked” if it provides a phone, or no phone at the same price is silly. But if there is a difference in price, then I guess calling it anything under the sun will make it known it is different to the standard fare.
        *I cannot get over the fact I just agreed with alain. Must go and take some form of medication, any medication that will get me over the shock*

  16. I’m loving all these “12 mbit is so slowwww!!!1” comments.

    Don’t tell Malcom. His FTTN plan basically offers that as the default typical speed. Oops.

    Also, Renai, the degree in which you fence sit, and then reverse your own points is becoming a bit obvious.

    Fresh from bagging Optus, they’re now the champion. Until John Linton weighs in, and then you’ll just agree with whatever he says, without actually stating your view.

    There is objective reporting, then there’s dancing on the point, without having one. ;)

    What do you actually think? An opinion article without an actual defined opinion.

    • hey Brendan,

      hard as this may be to believe, my opinion changes when I am presented with fresh evidence of new events. I’m not the sort of person who continues to hold the same view when fresh facts arrive. We live in a changing world.

      And yes, my views are complex. But then, so are the companies, policies and issues we’re dealing with here. I’m a libertarian socialist and even an objectivist at heart — which means I agree with Malcolm Turnbull often when he talks about the need for competitive forces in the market, and not re-implementing government monopolies. But I’m also a technologist, so I agree that fibre to the home trumps all other forms of broadband.

      Are these views contradictory? Nope. They relate to different areas. You can’t take an economics argument to a technological debate, and vice versa.

      I am always honest. I never write something purely for the sake of trolling — I always write what I believe at the time, on the basis of available evidence.

      Renai

      • Good lord, is that an opinion? :)

        Chalk that one up!

        And yes, I certainly agree with your comments. Things change. You have to be a bit foolish to not consider the options. And it wouldn’t be delimiter without the devil’s advocation.

        I was not initially impressed with the NBN, as it happens.

        I thought it was just another political gambit with about as much substance as alain’s typical responses to NBN topics.

        HOW IS ONT PORT FORMED? But I digress..

        Over time it became apparent that Snr Conroy was actually serious. So I stopped laughing and took interest. When the only real argument left comes down to cost, you’ve got to take a step back and work out if investing is actually the better option over “save money, at all costs”. I honestly believe it is.

        I never understood the ‘OPEL’ option; amazing to think that several years on, that same thinking is what Turnbull is offering today, for tomorrow. Even when his own party members are divided and switching to the pro NBN camp.

        Abbott is trying to sell a message through Turnbull, that his own party members disagree over. The camp is already heavily divided, it’s only going to get worse. ISPs are starting to plan/ work towards an NBN future.

        NBN plan releases such as we have from Optus further erode any notion that it’s unviable, too expensive or a waste.

      • there’s no such thing as a “libertarian socialist” !!!!!

        libertarians are 100% opposed to socialist ideology.

        judging by your gushing admiration for political identities such as Mark Husic and Scott Ludlam, you’re clearly 100% socialist in political leaning. you even admit to voting Greens which is a de facto Marxist political party.

        (don’t read the above as a “criticism”, but rather as a statement of “fact”.)

          • *jaw drops to the floor*

            Non-proprietarian libertarian philosophies, like libertarian socialism, hold that liberty is the absence of any form authority and assert that a society based on freedom and equality can be achieved through abolishing authoritarian institutions that control certain means of production and subordinate the majority to an owning class or political and economic elite.[63] Implicitly, it rejects any authority of private property and thus holds that it is not legitimate for someone to claim private ownership of any resources to the detriment of others.[64][65][66][67] Libertarian socialism is a group of political philosophies that promote a non-hierarchical, non-bureaucratic, stateless society without private property in the means of production. The two terms are often used interchangeably.[68][69][70] The term libertarian socialism is also used to differentiate this philosophy from state socialism[71][72] or as a synonym for left anarchism.[68][69][70] Libertarian socialists generally place their hopes in decentralized means of direct democracy such as libertarian municipalism, citizens’ assemblies, trade unions and workers’ councils.[73]

            that explains a lot…..

          • Libertarian socialism is opposed to all coercive forms of social organization, and promotes free association in place of government and opposes what it sees as the coercive social relations of capitalism, such as wage labor.[5] Adherents propose achieving this through decentralization of political and economic power, usually involving the socialization of most large-scale property and enterprise. Libertarian socialism tends to deny the legitimacy of most forms of economically significant private property, viewing capitalist property relations as forms of domination that are antagonistic to individual freedom.[21]

            wow….. that is some pretty extreme ideology…. abolishing capitalism… pretty much plain old Marxism in a different dress (by reinterpreting or contorting the meaning of “individual liberty”)

            i learnt something today :) thank you :)

          • I tell you what, Tosh, for your sake, when I get some time shortly I’ll do a post on the forum outlining my own personal philosophy, and you can criticise to your heart’s content. Zen Buddhism, minimalism, libertarian socialism, Foucault’s theories of power, Ayn Rand and objectivism, Karate and the theory of the artist. It’s complex, but I’ll lay it out for you so you can truly know what influences beat at the centre of this tragically flawed brain :D

          • just engaging in a thought exercise…. so, a “libertarian socialist” model of the internet industry would mean…. the eradication of large ISPs which dominate the industry because concentration of power is bad….. instead, you will have thousands of small little ISPs…. also, these small ISPs would have an equal voice or a seat on NBNco’s board…. and effectively run NBNco as a council of stakeholders… in turn, each of these small ISPs will also be run by a “workers’ council” comprising the ISP’s own employees….

            most interesting…. ;)

          • Hmm. I don’t really think you can easily slap-apply libertarian socialism onto an NBN structure, or really any capitalist structure as such. Nor do I think the philosophy is a realistic model which could be used in our extremely complex society at the moment — which has been built up over hundreds of years.

            Our current societal/economic/political paradigm reflects a complex blending of socialism, capitalism and other -isms (such as humanism). You can’t just replace one system with another — systems need to evolve towards different things. In this vein, as a libertarian socialism, I don’t advocate replacing one structure with another — that wouldn’t work. It wouldn’t be functional.

            Instead, I would advocate a gradual devolution of power structures, and see what happens, working with the structures of the day. Hence, I don’t like the national monopoly structure of the NBN, because too much power is concentrated in too few hands. I would much prefer that the private sector resolves these problems, because competition naturally stops any one player from getting too much power.

            Technologically, however, this doesn’t make much sense. National standards are generally needed for things like technology. You get rail-gauge issues that way. And so we arrive back at a centralised power structure.

            In this vein, Tosh, can you appreciate that my thinking is a little more complex than just taking one philosophy and applying it wholesale to everything? It’s horses for courses — not every philosophy can be applied to every situation ;)

          • you have to admit… since Telstra is owned by millions of ordinary mum and pop pensioner shareholders with tiny stakes… whereas some of Telstra’s main competitors are tightly-held by a few wealthy and powerful individuals… hence, Telstra is closer to a “libertarian socialist” model of economic ownership and control..

            ponder that one slowly… ;)

          • Actually it’s Internode that is closest to a libertarian socialist model — because the company doesn’t really appear to have that much of a profit incentive. Privately held companies tend to be a bit less capitalistic and a bit more socialistic ;)

          • *Internode….. doesn’t really appear to have that much of a profit incentive.*
            .
            .
            .

            *GAG*

            *CHOKE*

          • @Renai Le May

            Really, how much profit does Internode make that classifies them as not having a ‘profit incentive’?

          • Internode doesn’t acquire other companies for growth, discloses as much of its pricing methodologies to customers as possible, even rolls out unprofitable infrastructure in rural South Australia, operates at cost on some Telstra exchanges, has never listed on the ASX to make its founder worth $200 million, has no shareholders apart from Simon Hackett, tries not to fire staff and is broadly run like a family business.

            Compare that to iiNet, TPG, Telstra or Optus.

          • *even rolls out unprofitable infrastructure in rural South Australia*

            is that subsidised by taxpayers under the ABG scheme?

          • QUOTE:

            “This means that Internode will install no new Wireless DSL services and that all its ADSL services will be available only at list prices, with no applicable Broadband Connect subsidy. Internode has also halted all physical work on network construction in Broadband Connect areas serviced by the company. Another result of the program’s cancellation is that Internode has withdrawn its entry-level $29.95 broadband plan which was retained until now in order to make broadband more affordable for regional customers.”

            wow, they were sure quick to pull the plug on their “charitable activities” in regional areas….

            faster than an USAID truck fleeing the Sudanese Al-Qaeda militia….. ;)

    • @Brendan

      “Don’t tell Malcom. His FTTN plan basically offers that as the default typical speed. Oops.”

      Where does the Coalition plan say the ‘default typical speed’ of FTTN will be 12 Mbps?

      • “Where does the Coalition plan say the ‘default typical speed’ of FTTN will be 12 Mbps?”

        The OPEL deal was based on a minimum capability of 12Mbit.

        Unless Turnbull has claimed a new minimum speed, then it’s still 12mbit. Granted, it might do “up to 50 mbit”, but that’s entirely reliant on getting VDSL standards ratified for use in Australia, that aren’t presently and distance from the exchange.

        So, again, unless Mr Turnbull has a new policy, that will still stand.

        FTTH, unlike FTTN (or wireless) removes the distance-as-a-variable from the equation.

        • Update for Brendan:

          The current Coalition policy is NOT the OPEL policy, there is no Optus/Elders partnership, there is no majority WiMAX rollout solution.

          • “The current Coalition policy is NOT the OPEL policy, there is no Optus/Elders partnership, there is no majority WiMAX rollout solution.”

            Are you sure? It’s the same basic policy just with different people, namely Telstra (the heavy leaning on HFC basically means the Coalition want to get into bed with Telstra and Optus).

            Ok, they might have tidied it up a bit. Maybe broadened the scope to include technologies the Coalition cannot hope to use with regulation changes, but it’s the same damned model – massively under-invest and let someone else sort out the mess.

            The NBN policy has always stuck with FTTH + Wireless and Satellite. Turnbull’s policy is a basic rewording of Coonan’s, only with more Telstra, so maybe lets call it TELOP? OPTEL? OPSHOP?

            Turnbull is careful to make “observations” about what his ideal of an internet good time is, but there are precious little facts about how it specifcailly bolts together. Why?

            Because it relies on VDSL type standards that aren’t ratified for use in Australia, happily ignores the regulation minefield that requires changes to potentially force HFC wholesaling, assumes that wireless spectrum will magically be available and a raft of other “oops, I forgot to see if we can do that” assumptions. Oh, and that small matter of splitting Telstra and somehow magically (again) getting their cooperation to access the CAN.

            I can see those policies going through Parliament and the Senate in the space of a few months too, right?

            If you think that’s possible even in the long term, let alone short – tell ’em they’re dreamin’.

            Never mind that there is no, zero, nada, zip clarification on the cost of moving from FTTN, to FTTH. Why? It’s not on the radar. That means there’s no longterm goal. Funny that; it’s a bit of a pattern for the Liberals.

          • @Brendan

            “Are you sure?”

            Yeah I’m sure , what is about no Optus/Elders partnership and the lack of WiMAX which was a key component of the old OPEL policy don’t you understand?

            “the same basic policy just with different people, namely Telstra”

            Really so what agreement is there between Telstra and the Coalition that no one else in Australia knows about that you do?

            ” (the heavy leaning on HFC basically means the Coalition want to get into bed with Telstra and Optus).”

            Well there is a ‘heavy leaning on HFC’ with the NBN agreement also, it stays up for Foxtel, or have you forgotten that bit?

            ” Maybe broadened the scope to include technologies the Coalition cannot hope to use with regulation changes,”

            What ‘regulation changes’ are required before the Coalition policy can be implemented?

            ” but it’s the same damned model – massively under-invest and let someone else sort out the mess.”

            Sorry you have lost me there, what under-investment from who underpins the Coalition plan?

            “Turnbull’s policy is a basic rewording of Coonan’s, only with more Telstra, so maybe lets call it TELOP? OPTEL? OPSHOP?”

            Well there is shitload of Telstra in the NBN agreement, what do you think the shareholders voted on last month with the Telstra-NBN agreement worth billions of taxpayer dollars, a new corporate logo ?

            “Turnbull is careful to make “observations” about what his ideal of an internet good time is, but there are precious little facts about how it specifcailly bolts together. Why?”

            Because it’s not 2013 yet perhaps, why do you care in 2011?

            “Because it relies on VDSL type standards that aren’t ratified for use in Australia,”

            Really? where did you get that information from?

            ” happily ignores the regulation minefield that requires changes to potentially force HFC wholesaling, ”

            They pass legislation forcing Telstra to do it, what ‘minefield’?

            “assumes that wireless spectrum will magically be available and a raft of other “oops, I forgot to see if we can do that” assumptions”

            What extra spectrum does the Colaition plan require?

            ” Oh, and that small matter of splitting Telstra and somehow magically (again) getting their cooperation to access the CAN.”

            err HELLO ISP’s access the Telstra CAN today, or you under the impression everyone in Australia is waiting on the NBN so they can experience this new ‘internet’ phenomenon for the first time?

            “I can see those policies going through Parliament and the Senate in the space of a few months too, right?”

            Well neither did the NBN.

            “Never mind that there is no, zero, nada, zip clarification on the cost of moving from FTTN, to FTTH.”

            I have asked this question of you before, you ignored it, why does FTTN needed to be upgraded to FTTH real soon after rollout, what applications are going to force that upgrade?

  17. What would be truly “innovative” would be to meter the data in a similar fashion to how universities meter their data. Perhaps make local data dirt cheap, national data no so dirt cheap, and international data at a premium rate. This matches, some what, the the actual expense of conveying the data. This makes sense to me especially since “telecommuting” is one of the major selling points of the NBN.

  18. I guess I’ll be impressed when I get the NBN in 10 years or so. Let’s see how the prices look then shall we.

    FWIW 12Mb/s is slow. That’s what I get on copper and I’m not impressed. I can’t believe it’s an NBN speed option. 25Mb/s should be the absolute minimum and should be almost free. Even a 100Mb/s is slow compared to what we are seeing in Asia that are readying 1Gb/s

  19. Can’t help but notice you comparing Optus’s 1TB plan to iiNet’s ‘1TB’ plan and saying iiNet’s is better.

    I think it depends on the person, but making a blanket statement about it is a bit off-base.

    Remember that Optus’s comes wiht phone and unlimited calls, if you want phone on iiNet you’ll be up for $109 – so in the end you could argue it is only $20 difference.

    About that difference – iiNet’s 1TB is actually 500GB+500GB – Optus’s 1TB is simply 1TB.

    • Woops, I read Renai’s comments about Optus’s 1TB plan being $129 and assumed that came with the 100Mbps speed pack, it does not, it’s $149 with the speed pack – so the difference is really $40-$50

      Ok, I agree iiNet’s ‘1TB’ plan is better now :)

      With that said Internode’s 1TB lan is only $15 more – think I’d know who I’d rather be if for whatever reason I needed to download more than 500GB in peak time per month with such a small difference :P

  20. The idea that these plans are applauded goes to show a lack of appreciation for issues in the Australian carrier industry that the NBN is doing nothing to address and, in some cases, further worsen.

    The braindead PoI model being employed for the NBN build out favours companies such as Optus with a large investment in fibre network footprint and associated network infrastructure and skillset. Other carriers will need to go to the likes of Optus, Telstra, Nextgen and (possibly) Pipe in order to connect to most PoIs.

    As per usual, no coverage has been given to the grossly inequitable Gang of Four arrangement that Optus continues to benefit from for no reason other than a short-sighted act of the ACCC in 1997 requiring peering between Telstra, Optus, AAPT (then Connect.com) and Verizon (then Ozemail). As a result of this, every other carrier in the country directly or indirectly pays one (or more) of these four carriers for domestic transit. The fact that none of these four carriers peer at Equinix, Pipe or WAIX further aggravates the problem with the current market position the GoF has in servicing Australian content and application providers.

    The fact that Optus is essentially subsidised by the rest of the industry and is being paid millions to no longer wear the liabilities involved in running a residential access network should be included in any reasonable response to their NBN offerings, surely?

Comments are closed.