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

  • News, Telecommunications - Written by on Monday, November 14, 2011 11:32 - 206 Comments

    Citigroup: Coalition NBN plan “difficult to achieve”

    news A detailed analysis of the Coalition’s rival National Broadband Network policy has found the “quick and dirty” plan would be difficult to achieve, faces significant hurdles and would wind the telecommunications reform process in Australia back by three years, although it would cost less than Labor’s vision.

    The current generation of the Coalition’s alternative NBN policy was unveiled in early August this year by Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, although further details of it have emerged since. It outlines a scaled down approach to building national telecommunications infrastructure compared to the existing NBN policy, focusing on the likely separation of Telstra, upgrading current HFC cable infrastructure and targeted fibre to the node rollouts.

    Reaction to the plan at the time and since has been mixed, with some commentators seeing a more competition-friendly appeal in the policy, while others have slammed it due to its much more limited approach compared with Labor’s flagship NBN policy, which would see all Australians receive next-generation broadband infrastructure, funded directly by the government.

    Citigroup last week released one of the first extensive reports into the Coalition policy. Initially published by ZDNet.com.au, the report has since been taken down, but an anonymous reader has published the report in full online here.

    In the report, Citigroup wrote that the Coalition’s policy was broadly a “market-driven” approach to broadband that would be “cheaper and quicker to build” than the current NBN policy. Citigroup estimated the total cost of the NBN policy at $16.7 billion, compared to the NBN’s $35.9 billion. Most of that funds would go to the construction of national fibre to the node infrastructure in areas Telstra’s copper network already exists — or fibre to the home in populated areas where it doesn’t, such as new housing estates.

    However, the list of negative points Citigroup associated with the Coalition’s policy appeared to far outweigh the positive ones, with the analyst house arguing Turnbull’s plan had “some big hurdles”.

    “While the Coalition policy represents the low cost alternative, it does little to reform the telecom industry, it effectively winds the reform process back three years and it still faces significantly budgetary, political and legislative hurdles,” Citigroup wrote in its analysis. “We believe a major policy change will be difficult to achieve for the Coalition.”

    Core to the difficulty with the Coalition’s proposal is the future of NBN Co. On paper, Citigroup acknowledged this would be relatively easy.

    “The NBN project is not protected by legislation,” the group wrote in its report. “It’s a wholly owned government operation. If the Coalition wants to shut down NBN, it’s as simple as contacting CEO Mike Quigley and then just turning off the funding.”

    However, in practice, Citigroup noted there would be a number of obstacles to a Coalition Government winding back the company, ranging from accounting for expenditure already committed to the NBN project — as much as $15 billion by the next Federal Election to the question of what to do with the fibre rolled out thus far at that point (with the build estimated to hit some 1.3 million premises by that point) and re-drafting legislation.

    In addition, the report noted, difficulties could arise if the Greens continued to control the Senate — as the party is a strong supporter of the NBN project. And pushback may arrive during the election from electorates where the NBN is slated to be rolled out in the immediate future.

    Other problems could also stem from the implementation of the policy.

    NBN Co is seeking to establish a uniform wholesale pricing policy across its infrastructure around Australia. However, Citigroup noted that the Coalition’s heterogeneous plan would undermine this approach. The policy also runs the risk of concentrating infrastructure in metropolitan areas, and the analyst group even questioned whether the speeds available under the Coalition’s policy would be fast enough to meet Australia’s needs in the long term.

    “Unlike the NBN, the mix of access technologies used in the Coalition policy makes the upgrade path difficult,” the group wrote. “In other words, if the Coalition policy is implemented, it could simply delay an eventual national FTTH build.”

    And the Coalition’s time frame for infrastructure rollout will also lag significantly behind that of Labor’s current NBN plan, with Citigroup estimating that it will take until the first half of 2014 to finalise a cost/benefit analysis into the infrastructure, until the end of 2015 to complete new contractual negotiations between NBN Co and parties like Telstra, and until the end of 2018 to implement separation of Telstra.

    The release of the report attracted an immediate negative response from Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who wrote on Twitter last week that the report was “very ill-informed”. “Puzzled Citi would write this without speaking to us — file it in the fiction section,” he added.

    Opinion/analysis to be provided in a separate article.

    submit to reddit

    206 Comments

    You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

    1. Posted 14/11/2011 at 12:18 pm | Permalink |

      “Puzzled Citi would write this without speaking to us — file it in the fiction section,” added Turnbull

      Righto Malcolm. I’ll insert it between “The NBN monthly prices will be unaffordable”, and “12Mbps is enough for any application”.

      • Posted 14/11/2011 at 12:22 pm | Permalink |

        And why would they speak to Malcolm when they are preparing an independent report? Blowfly banging into windows at the moment!

        • Jeff Petre
          Posted 14/11/2011 at 1:12 pm | Permalink |

          I really think it’s MT’s job to communicate his policy detail clearly. If anyone if not interpreting it in the way he likes, then he needs to start bringing more detail to the table to combat it. Simply dismissing it as “fiction” smacks of childishness.

        • Jeff Petre
          Posted 14/11/2011 at 1:12 pm | Permalink |

          I really think it’s MT’s job to communicate his policy detail clearly. If anyone if not interpreting it in the way he likes, then he needs to start bringing more detail to the table to combat it. Simply dismissing it as “fiction” smacks of childishness.

          • alain
            Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:40 pm | Permalink |

            But then again if the report came out and praised the Coalition policy YOU would file it under fiction.

            • Beta
              Posted 14/11/2011 at 8:30 pm | Permalink |

              Here’s the flip-side to that accusation… (refer top comment)

              http://delimiter.com.au/2011/11/14/citigroup-coalition-nbn-plan-difficult-to-achieve/#comment-204415

            • Jeff Petre
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 9:35 am | Permalink |

              I would assess it as it stood, and make my own decision based on it’s merits. I want the Coalition to have a broadband policy I can get behind – I’ve voted for them in the past, and probably will again in the future, but their current plan is a mess of strategies and with little detail on how it will be implemented and achieve the telco reform that is clearly needed.

              • sumyngguy
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:21 am | Permalink |

                Hang on…

                you realise (by the title of your article) that you are saying replacing just the cabinet or pillar in the street is “difficult to achieve” , how would you explain then replacing every single copper wire to millions of homes and along the street, “easy to acheive?”

                • Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:17 pm | Permalink |

                  Did you even read the article? Strawman. You do realise that there is more to Broadband policy than just building the upgraded network right?

                  • sumyngguy
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:13 pm | Permalink |

                    Maybe you can enlighten me on the process involved in a national infrastructure upgrade…

                    • Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:15 pm | Permalink |

                      Maybe you could read the article.

                      I’ll start you off eh?

                      “While the Coalition policy represents the low cost alternative, it does little to reform the telecom industry, it effectively winds the reform process back three years and it still faces significantly budgetary, political and legislative hurdles,” Citigroup wrote in its analysis. “We believe a major policy change will be difficult to achieve for the Coalition.”

                    • Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:16 pm | Permalink |

                      Oh, and I might as well note that direct quote is likely the source of Renai’s title that you ripped into in the first place with your Strawman.

        • alain
          Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:05 pm | Permalink |

          @Micheal Wyres

          You need to look at the history of the NBN and the number of Independent reports produced for that.

          There was the McKinsey & Co and KPMG report done as part of the implementation study, they were commissioned by Conroy and his Department to do that report in consultation with them.

          Greenhill Caliburn were commissioned by Conroy and his Department to write a independent report on the NBN Business case.

          Citigroup were not hired by the Coalition to write a report on the Coalition policy so additional input was neither sought or given.

          Oh just as an aside the next election is not being held this weekend, Coalition policy is not locked in at November 2011, and they could change it again post 2013 election if they wish (if they win) just like Labor did in 2007.

          • Posted 14/11/2011 at 3:39 pm | Permalink |

            That’s the reason I’ve never read the McKinsey report…because there would be a bias there, Alian…

          • Beta
            Posted 14/11/2011 at 4:25 pm | Permalink |

            So alain, you are suggesting McKinsey & Greenhill reports are biased (due to coercion) and Citi’s isn’t, as the Coalition had no due influence…

            Ok… now read the article.

            • alain
              Posted 14/11/2011 at 7:35 pm | Permalink |

              I never mentioned the word bias at all, I just outlined that Labor commissioned the two NBN reports mentioned and provided input to them as distinct from the Citigroup report which was not commissioned by the Coalition.

              In fact the Labor Government was all gung ho about FTTN and WiMax at one stage prior to the 2007 election, then changed the mind post their 2007 win, hence my point that analysis of the moving target Coalition policy this far out from 2013 is a waste of time.

              “Labor has said it is prepared to work with the government’s existing WiMax plans if it wins the next election — but the party’s shadow Communications Minister is getting the knives out for the Coalition’s expert taskforce on fibre-to-the-node (FTTN).

              Should Labor come to power in this year’s Federal elections, the Coalition’s fibre plans are likely to be dismantled and replaced with Labor’s own AU$4.7bn vision of Australian FTTN.

              However, Labor has no plans to disassemble the bush WiMax network scheduled to go live in 2009, backed by the government and run by OPEL, a joint venture between Optus and Elders. ”

              Should Labor come to power in this year’s Federal elections, the Coalition’s fibre plans are likely to be dismantled and replaced with Labor’s own AU$4.7bn vision of Australian FTTN.”

              http://m.zdnet.com.au/labor-vows-to-establish-fttn-taskforce-that-knows-something-339281981.htm

              As you can see the before and after period of an election can change like the wind!

              :)

              • Beta
                Posted 14/11/2011 at 8:24 pm | Permalink |

                No you didn’t, I did, after reading the innuendo in your comment. But now that the innuendo has as usual, backfired, you are now backing away from the innuendo…LOL

                But gung ho, hardly…

                They said they wouldn’t dismantle WiMax, until OPEL breached their contract… You preach business well that’s business…and being a Telstra fanboi I’m sure you loved it when they did…!

                Interesting that Labor were initially interested in FTTN (or FTTP) until just how inappropriate FTTN is, was clearly spelled out to them by the panel of experts…!

                So the government learned and moved on, as we all hope theLibs will one day too.

                If they do actually learn and adopt and get rid of Abbott, well I might even vote for them…until them, they are all yours.

                • sumyngguy
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:26 am | Permalink |

                  unfortunately Labor has led us now down the fibre garden path …

                  Fibre is all the buzz now, so Turnbull must factor ‘Fibre’ into this plan.

                  Fibre = BIG $$$.

                  So if you attach Fibre + FTTN, you get a big number. Now throw in 3.7 Bn (way overkill btw) of wireless. All you have is the Rudd FTTN plan on the same steriods as NBNCo.

                  Unfortunately, NBNCo with its massive spend have distorted reality, and added a big political influence over the rational thinking of business and engineering disciplines.

                  The only thing that will stop this lunacy from continuing is for another election and the balance of power taken away from the greens and the independents in the rural seats who are skewing national policy which will cost everybody dearly.

                  • Beta
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:35 pm | Permalink |

                    Speaking of political… thanks for the campaign speeches…

                    So I’ll ask yet again…

                    Is there anyone out there who can mount a “rational” campaign against the NBN?

                    I.e. one which does NOT display obvious political agendas/mischievousness/ties?

                    • sumyngguy
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:16 pm | Permalink |

                      There is no need to. The NBN is purely political. It will sink under its own weight.

                      • Beta
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:06 pm | Permalink |

                        A I said to someone (who sounds coincidentally just like you) over at ZD…

                        For anyone to claim the NBN, which will supply all Aussies with improved comms, to be any more politically motivated, than those willing to stop/sabotage the NBN (at all costs) and ergo stop Aussies from having such improved comms, out of sheer ideological selfishness, is rank stupidity, imo…!

          • Hubert Cumberdale
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:24 pm | Permalink |

            “and they could change it again post 2013 election if they wish”

            They could do nothing, which is what their FTTN patchwork amounts to anyway.

            • alain
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:31 pm | Permalink |

              The NBN FTTH is patchwork.

              • Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:33 pm | Permalink |

                Alright, this, right here, is a troll unless you can tell me any reason you are saying this other than to provoke a response from Hubert?

                • alain
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:42 pm | Permalink |

                  The NBN is patchwork because it is a mix of infrastructure technologies FTTH, HFC, ADSL, satellite and wireless.

                  The Coalition plan is also a mix of technologies but it is only defined as patchwork why?

                  • Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:46 pm | Permalink |

                    You honestly can’t see it? You honestly have noticed that every time you make this smart arse retort HC gets all pissed off at you? And you honestly think it’s okay to continue to annoy him with this retort?

                    Really Alain? You can’t see how that this trolling?

                    Let me put it another way, in simple terms. EVERYTIME HC CALLS IT PATCHWORK IGNORE HIM. Capice?

                    • Hubert Cumberdale
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 3:06 pm | Permalink |

                      NightKhaos, you must be mistaken, I’m not pissed at all, look at it this way; alian here thinks that both networks are patchworks plans yet he gets offended when I point out that the coalition plan is a patchwork plan. Doesn’t take a genius to figure out he is a bit sensitive to any criticism of the coalition or their plan due to the lack of foresight.

                      • Posted 15/11/2011 at 3:15 pm | Permalink |

                        If that’s the case, then you are just trolling each other, and my advice applies to you as well. Ignore Alain whenever he says some smart-arse comment about the NBN being patchwork.

                      • Hubert Cumberdale
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 3:39 pm | Permalink |

                        I wouldn’t call it trolling (at least not in my case) Everyone knows what the coalition plan amounts to, so long as it is anything but fibre it’s in the mixing bowl! I’m just describing that as it doesn’t make much sense to be writing long sentences every time the topic comes up… but considering you have to explain everything in minute detail to alian here anyway maybe I should reconsider and write a whole definition so there are no further pedantic disputes.

                  • Hubert Cumberdale
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 3:21 pm | Permalink |

                    “The NBN is patchwork because it is a mix of infrastructure technologies FTTH, HFC, ADSL, satellite and wireless.”

                    That makes no sense. Since when are NBNco are installing/buying ADSL2+ DSLAMS? Rolling out HFC? Why would they when the fibre they are rolling out makes both of those technologies redundant. That’s why they are paying Telstra and Optus to transfer their customers to the superior network.

                    “The Coalition plan is also a mix of technologies but it is only defined as patchwork why?”

                    NBN = 93% fibre + 7% wireless & satellite, virtually guarantees the speed you pay for is the speed you get from 12/1mbps to 1000/400mbps no matter where you live. It is an efficient and well thought out design.

                    Coalition patchwork plan = Unknown mix of FTTH, FTTN, ADSL2+, wireless, satellite & HFC. The speeds are not reliable and the speed you get depends on where you live. This is not a very efficient or well thought out design thus this is a patchwork plan.

                    • Beta
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:30 pm | Permalink |

                      What I find most surprising HC, is that anyone who claims to be knowledgable in relation to comms, particularly one like our friend (ahem), can be so wrong with the absolute basics…

                      Suggesting that “the NBN is patch work because it is made up of FTTH, HFC, ADSL, satellite and wireless.”

                      WTF, HFC and ADSL?

                      This comment alone explains a lot, including credibility (as in lack thereof)…imo!

                      • sumyngguy
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:56 pm | Permalink |

                        As a telecoms engineer with many years working in telcos and OEM’s inc. Telstra, I can say – you are all wrong, and I’ll add, are idiots.

                        All networks are patchwork.

      • Hubert Cumberdale
        Posted 14/11/2011 at 12:50 pm | Permalink |

        It’s funny, “people” write “stuff” about the NBN without talking to NBNco all the time, that never seemed to bother Turnbull for some odd reason…

      • alain
        Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:24 pm | Permalink |

        @AustImages

        He could also insert it between the folders marked NBN finish date: 2018, 2020 and 2022.

    2. myne
      Posted 14/11/2011 at 12:21 pm | Permalink |

      You forgot to mention the holy grail of coalition ideology: the price.

      It costs 46% of what the NBN costs and only delivers FTTN to 40% of the population.

      • Camo
        Posted 14/11/2011 at 1:14 pm | Permalink |

        It looks like $17B for a broadband bandaid
        Very poor Bang for the Buck

        • Hubert Cumberdale
          Posted 14/11/2011 at 3:23 pm | Permalink |

          You got that right Camo. They are perfectly willing to screw Australians and waste taxpayers money just to prove a point though, consider the deplorable history of the coalition when it comes to telecommunications, the NBN will be no different if they win the next election. Not only that but they will effectively be creating yet another digital divide and certainly won’t accept responsibility for it.

          • sumyngguy
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:31 am | Permalink |

            I dont think its that bad, I mean, ask anyone in the metro/city of Australia, and I’m sure the vast majority are very happy with the options available in the market.

            For example, providers like TPG will offer unlimited braodband at ADSL2+ speeds for a total of $60pm. That is more than the demands for most people. There are other also very competitive plans from iiNet, Optus and Telstra.

            The only people who seem to have a problem are people from underserved “regional and rural” Australia, which I think you might be from, and you want a fibre service which in market economics is only viable in the metro demographic. So I point out the lunacy and the cost to everyone else in providing rolls royce service to the bush. For this reason the NBN will never be a market feasible solution, that is why no private company will touch it, however taxpayers are expected to foot a very steep price tag so a small number of people can have a rolls royce service they may use to download movies and make phone calls.

            • Hubert Cumberdale
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:48 am | Permalink |

              “I dont think its that bad”

              Of course you dont. It’s easy to think that when you have your head buried in the sand.

              “ask anyone in the metro/city of Australia, and I’m sure the vast majority are very happy with the options available in the market. ”

              Go. Do it. Ask people in “metro/city of Australia” if they are happy with the options available in the market. I dare you.

              “For example, providers like TPG will offer unlimited braodband at ADSL2+ speeds for a total of $60pm. That is more than the demands for most people”

              Exactly what are you basing that on? Who are most people?

              “and you want a fibre service which in market economics is only viable in the metro demographic.”

              Actually it is viable due to the nature of the rollout which covers both metro and regional areas.

              “So I point out the lunacy and the cost to everyone else in providing rolls royce service to the bush.”

              You think it’s a “rolls royce service” I say it’s just raising the standard.

              “For this reason the NBN will never be a market feasible solution”

              Seems you haven’t been paying attention.

              “however taxpayers are expected to foot a very steep price tag”

              False.

              “they may use to download movies and make phone calls.”

              Is this what you think the internet is all about?

              • sumyngguy
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:12 pm | Permalink |

                Let me guess Hubert, you CANT get TPG ADSL2+ unlimited where you live?

                If you could get it, or Optus Cable, or iiNet OnNet internet, like the millions who live in Sydney , Melbourne etc.. you’d wonder what’s the need for $43Bn on a fibre network, when the current one does all that we need, at a spend of $0.

                Of course if they can improve it by FTTN, and bring prices even lower and improve performance, thats a plus, but at a REASONABLE price. Otherwise, I’m more than happy with what the market currently offers.

                I can order an unlimited ADSL2+ plan, I live 1.5Km from the exchange, so for around $60 I can get unlimited downloads and connect prob. around 1.5MegaBytes (~16Mbits). Pfft, what more do I need.

                • Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:26 pm | Permalink |

                  Your assumptions about the people who want fibre being exclusive to people outside of the areas of high speed, high quota networks are unfounded and not verified. Do not use your own motivations and experiences to judge other people.

                  • sumyngguy
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:17 pm | Permalink |

                    No, my analysis is correct and simply highlights the root cause.

                    • Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:18 pm | Permalink |

                      Begging the question much?

                    • Hubert Cumberdale
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:37 pm | Permalink |

                      Your “analysis” is an unmitigated disaster. Just like over at ZDnet where you thought the FTTH for regional areas only came about because of the hung parliament result at the last election.

                      • sumyngguy
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:57 pm | Permalink |

                        Youve got no idea what youre on about, I bet youve never even been inside a telephone exchange.

                      • Hubert Cumberdale
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 7:10 pm | Permalink |

                        If you bet $1000 you’d lose exactly $1000… but remind me what this has to do with the amount of fish in China?

                • Hubert Cumberdale
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:31 pm | Permalink |

                  “Let me guess Hubert, you CANT get TPG ADSL2+ unlimited where you live?”

                  What? Why would this even be an issue? I get ADSL2+ (~13mbps down and less than 1mbps up) with 1tb, which is basically an unlimited plan for me. (Derp!)

                  “you’d wonder what’s the need for $43Bn on a fibre network”

                  No, I wouldn’t wonder at all. I’d still be endorsing a fibre network as I have since 1996.

                  “when the current one does all that we need”

                  False. The current one does all YOU need, that is surf the web and write a few emails. You can do that on dial-up. Other people would like to do more than that.

                  “when the current one does all that we need, at a spend of $0.”

                  But you endorse a FTTN patchwork that you consider a “reasonable price”, using your logic one would think any price above $0 would be a waste when “the current one does all that we need”

                  “Of course if they can improve it by FTTN, and bring prices even lower and improve performance”

                  A FTTN patchwork is not much of an improvement. Upload speeds would still be an issue and any future speed increases would simply not be possible without spending even more money. Prices wont be lower for FTTN they be the about the same as you pay now except you’ll be paying for an inferior service. Not very good value for money.

                  “Otherwise, I’m more than happy with what the market currently offers.”

                  Great, glad to hear it, you can be even more happy with the NBN…

                  “Pfft, what more do I need.”

                  To get a clue. You are happy with the speed you get then just get a 12/1mbps plan on the NBN. The system works!

                  • alain
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:59 pm | Permalink |

                    @HC

                    “Upload speeds would still be an issue”

                    Here we go again repeating the same old mantra over and over, it’s not a ‘issue’ just because you say it is.

                    on stand-by for mindless mantra No 2 – ‘Thanks for stopping by’.

                    • Hubert Cumberdale
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:19 pm | Permalink |

                      “Here we go again repeating the same old mantra over and over”

                      Stop repeating yourself then, you are boring, surely you must be as bored as everyone else by now reading what you type…

                      “it’s not a ‘issue’ just because you say it is.”

                      That’s right it’s not an issue becasue I say it is, it is an issue because people are not only wanting faster download speeds but they are also wanting faster UPLOAD speeds and that has been the one thing that has been lacking until now.

                      • alain
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:25 pm | Permalink |

                        What people are wanting faster upload speeds that only FTTH can provide, what can residences in FTTH Greenfield estates and the NBN pilot areas do with their fantastic upload speeds that the poor punters suffering with HFC and ADSL2+ cannot?

                      • Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:31 pm | Permalink |

                        I really think there should be some kind of study to prove that faster upload speeds are useful and required in future consumer Broadband investment (my gutt instinct is yes), but we don’t have any evidence or anything to otherwise prove it.

                        It’s annoying because you would think is the kinda consumer research that companies would undertake and make publicly available considering Broadband policy is one of the big things in politics across the world right now? Maybe there is already a report somewhere floating around and I can’t find it through.

                      • Hubert Cumberdale
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 3:25 pm | Permalink |

                        ” residences in FTTH Greenfield estates

                        So how do you justify laying this fibre even though copper is sufficient for today’s needs? Isn’t laying this fibre as waste when we don’t need these faster speeds now? What is the purpose? Explain it. What is the purpose of laying fibre in Greenfield estates if they do not need that speed now? And what is the point of this exercise if there is no intention of laying fibre everywhere else?

                      • alain
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:47 pm | Permalink |

                        Sorry I missed the answer amongst all those ‘detour this way’ signs, what do residences that have FTTH today in Australia do with their new high speed upload speed that others cannot that is so important it means we have to roll it out to 93% of the population at outrageous cost to 100% of taxpayers?

                      • Hubert Cumberdale
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 7:07 pm | Permalink |

                        Sorry I was waiting for the inevitable taxpayers whinge… We’ve already discussed the benefits of higher upload speeds a hundred times already so now it’s time for your to answer the question about greenfields which you conveniently dodged over at ZDnet too, dont think I didn’t notice.

                • N
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:34 pm | Permalink |

                  Well, I am in Melbourne and have access to TPG and their unlimited ADSL2+ plans. Shame that I can’t get a connection any faster than about 6mbs. And when it rains, my connection will drop to as low as 2mbs… or even disappear altogether. That’s because of the rubbish copper in my area that Telstra refuses to fix or upgrade.

                  It’s also a shame that I have to pay $22/month for a Telstra landline connection just so I can even have my ADSL2+… despite the fact that I haven’t made a landline phone call from home in almost 5 years.

                  • sumyngguy
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:01 pm | Permalink |

                    That’s because Telstra has stopped maintaining their lines because their share price has been falling, its worth less than 50% of what it used to be.

                    It needs to cut costs, so it outsources its maintenance, if any is done at all. And it also does not upgrade when it needs to. Any machine eg. your car , that isnt regularly service will begin to perform below its peak.

                    The question is really, how far are you from your exchange, and you can figure our what your speed will be, as copper network is for the most part design with shortest distance req. for max. coverage in the network distribution.

                    • Beta
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:06 pm | Permalink |

                      But yet some want to connect (FTTN) to this under maintained, worn out, copper network!

                      Foolish eh?

                    • N
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 7:14 pm | Permalink |

                      Right, so what you are saying is that Telstra don’t maintain the copper because they don’t have to. They’ve got a monopoly and they plan on exploiting it… can’t really blame them, that’s private enterprise for you. Personally, I’d prefer that monopoly to be in the hands of the NBNCo who have a charter to actually do something useful. Throwing more money at Telstra will just result in Telstra doing more of what they already do… ie, nothing.

                      FWIW, based on my distance from the exchange, my best hope for ADSL2+ is a connection speed of around 10-12mbs. For the money that it would cost to rip up the old copper only to replace it with MORE COPPER… seems like a massive waste. OR, you could put down FTTN, but I’d still be still with crappy copper for the last mile. Whichever way you look at it, the coalition plan (whatever it is) seems to be the REAL waste of money. Lost of money, but not a huge outcome.

            • Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:13 pm | Permalink |

              Um, no.

              I live in residential area of Perth metro and maximum broadband speed I can get is around 4mbit due to line length to my exchange.

              Due to the exchanges size, you can choose one of the following providers: Telstra, resold Telstra or iiNet. That’s it.

              FTTN or FTTH will fix this, however I much prefer FTTH as then it won’t need to be upgraded in 20 years when FTTN has done it’s dash. FTTN is just a band aid. And I dont vote Labor or Liberal one way or another but I am a IT Systems Manager with around 25 years experience with networking.

              • sumyngguy
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:05 pm | Permalink |

                Thats why FTTN would suit your needs.

                Its true that there are some people who live in metro areas who can’t get the highest speeds, that is why Telstra thought about spending 4.7Bn to upgrade its network to FTTN and remove this problem, in addition to problems experience with old copper main trunks that will be replace with fibre. This brings everyone in line and at a reasonable price, privately paid for.

                You dont need a 100mbps fibre connection, there is a thing called ‘overkill’, nor do you need $43Bn, nor wait 8-10-15 yrs to have it built by which time the fibre is already half past its working life

                • Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:26 pm | Permalink |

                  Wait a second… “half past it’s working life”…

                  1) You haven’t actually verified that the working life of a network is 20 years. You have asserted that the cables may start to degrade, without any verification of this, and further a degraded cable still may be able to perform within required parameters.

                  2) Even if the maximum working life is 20 years, that is the first release site, so, when the person gets rolled out to them their cables have 20 years to work. It’s not like after 20 years after the network stops working that all of the cables in the network just suddenly stop “working”.

                  And have you heard of future proofing? Do you think in 10 years time he won’t want or need a 100Mbps connection? Look at the Citi report where they discuss this.

                  • sumyngguy
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:04 pm | Permalink |

                    this is because you havent done your research. Telcos pretty much consider their fibres end of life when it reaches 20yrs. 30yrs pretty much dead. while the thing works, certain fibres would have gone dead by then, and the remainder will vary in conistency, and therefore deemed ready for decomissioning.

                    In the same way you have a copper cable, some pairs remain good, others have died long ago, many inbetween. To say that if NBNCo puts the fibre in now, that it will all be pristine and operational after 50yrs is totally wrong. The likely scenario is after 20yrs, it will have already be over the hump, and start to go down, by 30yrs , it would be similar to the copper network is today, if not worse.

                    Telcos today do no use 30yr old cables, ie. installed in teh 80s, as theyre not reliable and could go unexpectedly. Even those laid in the 1990s are considered obsolete and are usually small number of cores in them, ie. only 30 fibre bundles. Today, they are up to 600+ fibre bundles. It shows how the technology moves on. This dispells the myth that the NBN is future proof on the basis of the fibre alone, its not some miracle thing, it has physical limitations in the real world.

                    • Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:07 pm | Permalink |

                      And copper is more as future proof, especially we gradually reducing the footprint? Don’t make laugh.

      • alain
        Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:08 pm | Permalink |

        Where did you get the 40% figure from?

        • Gwyntaglaw
          Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:41 pm | Permalink |

          Please turn to page 6 of the report, alain, and all will be revealed…

        • Hubert Cumberdale
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:22 pm | Permalink |

          “Where did you get the 40% figure from?”

          Derp! Derp! Derp! http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17532784/NBN_CoalitionPolicy_Nov11.pdf

          • alain
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:39 pm | Permalink |

            No that’s the Citigroup report, where does it say in Collation policy that only 40% of the population will be covered by FTTN?

            • Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:43 pm | Permalink |

              You mean to say that the Citigroup report which is based upon the coalition policy outlined so far is making up statistics now?

              • alain
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:50 pm | Permalink |

                If it is based on the Coalition policy where does the Coalition Policy mention 40% FTTN?

                • Beta
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:53 pm | Permalink |

                  Didn’t you just rest your case 2 minutes ago?… (rolls eyes)!

            • Dean
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:44 pm | Permalink |

              Nobody said it came from the Coalition.

              • alain
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:48 pm | Permalink |

                Oh I see, case is rested.

            • Hubert Cumberdale
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 3:27 pm | Permalink |

              You asked myne “Where did you get the 40% figure from?” You have the answer so STFU.

    3. Gwyntaglaw
      Posted 14/11/2011 at 12:36 pm | Permalink |

      The Citigroup report commits the heinous act of taking Malcolm Turnbull at his word, and adding a dash of common sense.

      The facts that Malcolm doesn’t like the result, and has disowned it in record speed, does not change this.

      Seriously, can anyone tell me what Turnbull could have told them to make any material change to the outcome, other than twiddle the dials on the policy settings for the breakdown between various technologies – which would affect the outcome very little?

      • alain
        Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:18 pm | Permalink |

        @Gwyntaglaw

        “Seriously, can anyone tell me what Turnbull could have told them to make any material change to the outcome, ”

        Turnbull doesn’t have to change anything, assuming he is even motivated to want to change anything.

        What are you hoping here, voters will read the Citigroup report and decide solely on the outcomes written in 2011 I will vote Labor in 2013 and then go back to sleep for the next two years?

        :)

        • Gwyntaglaw
          Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:50 pm | Permalink |

          Yes, alain. Yes, that’s exactly what I hope – that the great voting public will suddenly develop a hunger for reading reports, full of numbers and tables and big words. **Sigh**

          “Turnbull doesn’t have to change anything, assuming he is even motivated to want to change anything.”

          Indeed he doesn’t have to change anything. He can of course be as cynical as he wishes. But your comment is predicated on the assumption that his public statements, and the Citigroup report based on those statements, do in fact represent the Coalition policy, shambolical as it is.

          Since you asked, my hope in fact is that this report will be a catalyst for more searching analysis and questioning of the Coalition proposal – one that has resisted much detailed scrutiny so far. While the voting public may not read it, analysts and commentators on technology and politics will, and it is their thoughts and views that DO shape public opinion – gradually, and bit by bit.

          • alain
            Posted 14/11/2011 at 3:16 pm | Permalink |

            Actually I prefer to wait for reports on Coalition policy six months or so before the 2013 election, it is only November 2011 after all, I bet Coalition policy changes many times before then depending on how many Telstra regions are switched off from copper completely because the 90% residences passed with the NBN cut over figure which is a key part of the Telstra/NBN Co agreement has taken place.

            It also depends if Telstra wants to play ball with FTTN, between you me and the gate post I don’t think they will be that interested by 2013, so Coalition policy will be more about a shift of ownership of the NBN FTTH and who rolls out the balance until the next election after that.

            • Gwyntaglaw
              Posted 14/11/2011 at 3:23 pm | Permalink |

              Knock me over with a feather, why don’t you, alain! You and I are in agreement!

              “It also depends if Telstra wants to play ball with FTTN, between you me and the gate post I don’t think they will be that interested by 2013, so Coalition policy will be more about a shift of ownership of the NBN FTTH and who rolls out the balance until the next election after that.”

              Wow! I agree with every word. (PS The gate post agrees too.)

              • Beta
                Posted 14/11/2011 at 3:38 pm | Permalink |

                Indeed…

                Telstra is one of the main stumbling blocks to the FTTN plan (as well as it being pretty silly imo, to link fibre to copper – think 90% bitumen road and 10% dirt, with the owner of the dirt able to dictate terms)…

                The best way around that is to precluded them from the infrastructure side and voila…

                Umm, just like… the, anyone…? Begins with N

                • sumyngguy
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:36 am | Permalink |

                  What Turnbull would have liked to have done would be to implement the OPEL solution. I’m sure that is what he would do if the Liberals got back into power.

                  Im certain the Liberals would scrap the NBN since it is economically unviable. The reason why Malcolm put out the Liberals plan is that they need an alternative solution to the NBN. And while Labor is in power, and are starting from such a high pricing point of ~$43Bn, the Liberals must offer a solution that is comparable. They’re not calling the tune.

                  But the solution to this problem is to let Telstra build the FTTN network at about $4.7Bn of private money, and the gov’t further invest $1Bn in the OPEL plan, in addition to $2Bn in wireless solutions.

                  • Beta
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:16 pm | Permalink |

                    Please prove the NBN economically unviable…!

                    Then while you point the finger and suggest everyone here lives in the bush (sigh) and therefore loves the NBN and hates Telstra (sigh) tell us why you think Telstra and Optus/Elders (OPEL) should be handed the reigns (without a fair RFP process – particularly as OPEL breached their previous contract and Telstra submitted a non-compliant bid) and why if Telstra have shafted disgruntled people, they shouldn’t be angry?

                    • sumyngguy
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:24 pm | Permalink |

                      I’ll prove it and hand over your 100page report but I’ll charge KPMG rates.

                      Btw Beta, I bet if you could get access to TPG’s unlimited data plan of $60pm ADSL2+, you wont be here in this blog, youd be busy downloading moives and playing Call of Duty – Modern Warfare 3 Online.

                      I on the other hand do not do these things, but if I wanted to, I could order it today and be doing it in a few days after the technician comes and installs my serive. That is what I mean that there isn’t much wrong with the market or the products ISPs and Telcos offer, the system works, and I am happy with it. But if they wanna throw in $4.7Bn for FTTN and my it work even better, meh… I’m okay with that, as long as its privately funded.

                      • Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:32 pm | Permalink |

                        Again you’re putting people into a box and making assumptions about them. Okay, and go on, change your KPMG report, and then have it peer reviewed to ensure your assumptions hold up to reality.

                        Money where mouth is

                      • Beta
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:32 pm | Permalink |

                        LOL… so you are unable to prove it (rolls eyes)… right o…next…

                        And I ‘d suggest if you weren’t a Telstra stakeholder/fanboi and rabid Liberal voter you wouldn’t be here, would you?

                        See, we can both make assumptions! Only thing is, mine, I bet is pretty well spot on…

                        And really what a stupid argument you have… the NBN is about giving to those who do not have, yet you criticise those who do not have (incidentally not me and that has been on the record for ages…)?

                        Again I ask if people have been screwed by Telstra, as you suggest, why shouldn’t they whinge…?

                      • alain
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:27 pm | Permalink |

                        @Beta

                        “I ‘d suggest if you weren’t a Telstra stakeholder/fanboi and rabid Liberal voter you wouldn’t be here, would you?”

                        You can prove this or is it just your usual trolling, I bet 100% it’s trolling eh?

                      • Beta
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:17 pm | Permalink |

                        You bet it’s 100% trolling…?

                        You can prove this or is it just your usual trolling, I bet 100% it’s trolling eh?

                        Your turn, child!

                      • alain
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:21 pm | Permalink |

                        I can prove what?

                      • Beta
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:24 pm | Permalink |

                        LOL… alain has just been out alain’d

        • Hubert Cumberdale
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:23 pm | Permalink |

          “assuming he is even motivated to want to change anything.”

          I think we can safely assume he is not motivated to do anything. The coalition were not motivated to do anything for +10 years so given the history it’s doubtful this backwards thinking behavior will ever change.

    4. deteego
      Posted 14/11/2011 at 1:38 pm | Permalink |

      Well one thing that (so far) is incorrect with the report, is its claim on cancellation of contracts being difficult because of the timeframes i.e.

      However, in practice, Citigroup noted there would be a number of obstacles to a Coalition Government winding back the company, ranging from accounting for expenditure already committed to the NBN project — as much as $15 billion by the next Federal Election to the question of what to do with the fibre rolled out thus far at that point (with the build estimated to hit some 1.3 million premises by that point) and re-drafting legislation.

      So far all of the construction contracts done by NBNCo are around 3 years in length, after that fiasco with the tender process

      Also regarding the comment of greens in power, there isn’t going to be any hung parliament for the next term of government, so the greens will become as irrelevant as they were before this term of government

      • Gwyntaglaw
        Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:39 pm | Permalink |

        “So far all of the construction contracts done by NBNCo are around 3 years in length, after that fiasco with the tender process”

        You mean the fiasco which just successfully resulted in Australia-wide coverage? Or are you referring to the News Ltd beat-up which interprets every stage of a business negotiation as a “failure”?

        If the contracts are seen to be working well, there is nothing to prevent the Gillard government from triggering the renewal clause in 2013, provided it is done before the caretaker period immediately before the election.

        “Also regarding the comment of greens in power, there isn’t going to be any hung parliament for the next term of government, so the greens will become as irrelevant as they were before this term of government”

        I think the relevant consideration here is that they will hold the balance of power in the Senate – you know, the other chamber of parliament by which all legislation must be passed?

        • alain
          Posted 14/11/2011 at 3:00 pm | Permalink |

          “You mean the fiasco which just successfully resulted in Australia-wide coverage?”

          No this one.

          http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/nbn-co-in-legal-payout-for-delay/story-e6frgaif-1226147335792

          • Gwyntaglaw
            Posted 14/11/2011 at 3:17 pm | Permalink |

            Seriously, alain? Could you please point out the “fiasco” identified in that… ahem… “article” by the Australian… “newspaper”?

            That story is an example of straining to find bad news in a fairly boring Annual Report. And in this case, boring is exactly what you want.

            • alain
              Posted 14/11/2011 at 7:02 pm | Permalink |

              So what are you saying nothing like that happened ‘because it’s in the Australian’, you really believe that ?

              • nonny-moose
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:01 pm | Permalink |

                i dont think hes debating that anything has happened, Alain, so much as your claim it is a ‘fiasco’ …. in fact surprisingly for the Aussies editorial slant that story actually had lots of good news in it. Otherwise, id have to agree that skepticism ‘because it’s in the Australian’ is usually warranted given a distinct editorial slant to Liberal fluff pieces. and thats fine, you will always get a slight slant from any writer; even Renai. but if you are reading the Aussie – or any publication – and not making allowances for it then you have to expect people are going to laugh at you for taking their word so uncritically.

                for my part i dont think ‘nothing like that happened’. but rather, in the whole scheme of NBNco things, it is what one would describe more as a business hitch than a fiasco. the difference is in degree of import you and the Aussie have ascribed it, which clearly is higher up the Chicken Little scale than we see it.

                nice deflection from the post election prospects in the Senate BTW. Gwyntags assessment pretty much parallels mine; extension clause and the balance of power in the senate are important considerations even if the hung House falls back into the ownership of the Liberals.

                • alain
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 7:02 pm | Permalink |

                  I never mentioned the Senate in my post let alone ‘deflected from it’ , it’s all in black and white on the electoral site.

                  If the Coalition win in 2013 in the Lower House they will still not hold power in the Senate even if a Senate election is held at the same time (they usually are to save on election costs) and they gain majority in both houses, because the terms of the Senators depending on when they were elected don’t expire until June 2014 and June 2017 respectively.

    5. toshP300
      Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:50 pm | Permalink |

      rubbish report written by a 3rd rate ex-media analyst parachuted in by Citi-broke from London

      move along, folks….

      • Gwyntaglaw
        Posted 14/11/2011 at 2:53 pm | Permalink |

        Thanks Tosh! We await with eager interest your own report, since you appear to have volunteered for the task.

        Or to take the easier exit, would you care to point out where the report is so fatally flawed? Any bits of analysis you might hold up to scrutiny? Any engaged argument that you might want to advance?

        • sumyngguy
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:43 am | Permalink |

          I bet you live in some regional or rural town far away from the urban sprawl, and youve been getting bad service from Telstra for years.

          That it at the heart of all your problems.

          • Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:34 pm | Permalink |

            Again. With. The. Assumptions. About. Why. People. Support. The. NBN.

            • sumyngguy
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:24 pm | Permalink |

              Again, the truth hurts.

              I’ m sorry you cant get broadband cos you choose to live very far away from the major economic centres of the country.

              But then again, Malcolm will offer you OPEL (wireless broadband), but happy with that and stop whinging, cos as a city folk, I live where the market is profitable and I can get my services cheap because its because it is feasible from a business and economic point of view, and private investors like TPG and iiNet choose to service the areas I live around.

              By the same argument, NBN is making promises to service uneconomically feasible areas, and worse still, they want to plant a rolls royce fibre service where even the cities and businesses cannot afford, and where private businesses find it difficult to profit from despite being in a high ecnomically yielding area. That explains why the NBN has a massive price tag, it is to fund a non-feasible enterprise from a economic and engineering persepective.

              • Dean
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:32 pm | Permalink |

                It must be nice living in your own little “the internet is good enough for me, therefore it should be good enough for everybody” bubble.

                • alain
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:01 pm | Permalink |

                  Well it’s the same argument from the pro-NBN side, I need a faster upload speed so therefore everyone does.

                  • Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:11 pm | Permalink |

                    You’re using the specific opinion of one individual (HC in this case) to represent the opinions of a whole group. It’s one thing to undermine HC’s assumption, it’s another to think that assumption is shared by everyone in the group.

                    • Hubert Cumberdale
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:33 pm | Permalink |

                      Indeed it is an assumption as I dont think that at all. I think if I can get a certain speed everyone else should be able to get that speed if they want it and if they want something slower they should have that choice too. That is the benefit of the NBN you get to chose your speed (down & up) based on your wants/needs rather than have it dictated to you by the length/condition of the copper.

                      • Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:35 pm | Permalink |

                        You have no need to justify your position on upload to me Hubert. See my other comment where I said I think there should be consumer market research on this done if it hasn’t been already.

                      • alain
                        Posted 16/11/2011 at 9:19 am | Permalink |

                        @HC

                        “I think if I can get a certain speed everyone else should be able to get that speed if they want it and if they want something slower they should have that choice too.”

                        I’m happy with ADSL2+ then.

                      • Hubert Cumberdale
                        Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:34 am | Permalink |

                        “I’m happy with ADSL2+ then.”

                        Great. Get a 12/1mbps NBN plan and stop you pedantic whining.

                        1. [insert I dont want to pay more than I pay now whine]
                        2. [insert I just want a phone without internet plan whine]
                        3. [insert taxpayers whine]
                        4. [insert bubububu I'm still emotionally attached to the copper whine]
                        5. [insert monopoly whine]

                        Which one will he pick today. Place your bets people!

              • Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:36 pm | Permalink |

                Alright then. I currently live in Northern Sydney approximately 30 minutes from the city, and have access to TPG infrastructure.

                So let’s try this again, without that assumption on the table?

                • sumyngguy
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:08 pm | Permalink |

                  then it looks like youre just a net virgin, you should get a life. If youre in Nth Sydney with so many providers, youre a massive whinger, you want 100mbps? why ? dont you have a life?

              • CC
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:17 pm | Permalink |

                By the same arguments, copper phone lines should not be rolled out to those not in urban areas? Copper phone lines cost no less to roll out than fibre optic lines. They cost more to maintain. Why is it ok to cover some people with USO for copper lines but no ok to provide the same service at the same cost with fibre?

                • sumyngguy
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:16 pm | Permalink |

                  In many cases in regional and most rural cases, it is unfeasible dollar wise to give people a rolls royce connectioning built on fibre that even a place like the Opera House or the Rialto towers or some office block in Ann St. brisbane would find it difficult to afford if at times justify. But these guys want it to their farm and large acre blocks so they can download heaps of movies and play online games, wtf?

                  Where are our priorities? You’d think money grew on trees with Labors grand plans of overkill. But to answer your question, the best solution for rural areas is to keep the copper POTS line but offer a solid quality wireless solution like LTE/4G that can deliver up to 100mbps. Since there is less people there is less contention for the capacity, and, the rollout can be done cheaper and cover mmore people.

                  For regional towns, a FTTN solution does work and is cost effective, but it also needs to be supplemented with wireless. In addition, I would bring back DSL extender/repeater techonology for customers that are well and truly far away. Telstra used to use repeater technology on its copper and quite effiectively, to extend a signal, however due to its low share price, it decided to only meet its minimum obligations.

    6. Beta
      Posted 15/11/2011 at 8:29 am | Permalink |

      Isn’t it interesting…

      Whenever there is an article on the current NBN (be it positive or otherwise) the forum is saturated with literally 100’s of mostly argumentative comments, with mandatory intense negativity, stemming from a small number of perpetual NBN detractors, who easily, top the post counts.

      Yet here is a negative article on the oppositions counter NBN proposal with, in comparison, relatively few posts.

      Because those who support the current NBN say… “yeah no biggy, that’s simply what we have been saying all along (with other expert opinion as our basis) about FTTN”, so…. While the same group of current NBN detractors/opposition supporters, really have no actual defence, to the inappropriateness of FTTN and the oppositions ideological, back to the future plan…

      • alain
        Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:38 am | Permalink |

        “Whenever there is an article on the current NBN (be it positive or otherwise) the forum is saturated with literally 100′s of mostly argumentative comments,”

        … which is in reaction to saturated pro-NBN BS comments, many from you in your many trolling name change disguises.

        ” with mandatory intense negativity, stemming from a small number of perpetual NBN detractors, who easily, top the post counts.”

        With mandatory blind one eyed no fact blind optimism usually from a small number of perpetual NBN apologists who easily top the post counts, especially from you because you have to keep changing your name to avoid perpetual bans.

        “Yet here is a negative article on the oppositions counter NBN proposal with, in comparison, relatively few posts.”

        It is not a totally negative article, how many posts do you want to make it ‘RS/Rizz/Pepe/Bah/ Beta/Alain’s Master’ acceptable’? LOL

        “Because those who support the current NBN say… “yeah no biggy, that’s simply what we have been saying all along (with other expert opinion as our basis) about FTTN”,

        No they don’t, that’s you making up what they are saying, because you need to artificially generate argument so you can make a point about it (if you can call it that).

        ” so…. While the same group of current NBN detractors/opposition supporters, really have no actual defence, to the inappropriateness of FTTN ”

        Yes they do, you just don’t like it, but that’s not the same as ‘no defence’

        “and the oppositions ideological, back to the future plan…”

        … as distinct to Labors ideological back to the future plan that the sucker taxpayer will be wearing the cost burden of for decades, what the latest ever moving finish date extension this month?

        • sumyngguy
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:50 am | Permalink |

          alain,

          these NBN guys are those who live in places that have been screwed by Telstra for 15yrs of its privatisation.

          So they are just disgruntled broadband geek virgins, because theyve never had it good like all the folk who live in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane etc. who have plenty of choice from heaps of competitors like iiNet, Telstra, TPG in nearly all of the local exchanges. And best of all the price is always falling, and the value for money always going up. I can pay around $60-80pm and get all that i need. I can play online games, download movies, watch online TV etc etc.

          Most of those disgruntled people here just want Telstra to be gone and NBNCo to waste a hell of a lot of money and sink us into debt by building white elephants. All this because they are broadband virgins and sit at home getting angry that Telstra wont provide them with fast unlimited broadband. I on the other hand can call up right now to Optus or TPG and order a nice broadband plan, walk to my nearest dept store and purchase an xbox and Modern Warefare 3 and be playing online while downloading a HD movie … all this within a few days (after my ADSL port is connected to my line) … and all I have to pay is around $60pm. WHERES THE PROBLEM? They system works!

          • Mike
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:28 am | Permalink |

            The Troll is strong in this one.

            • sumyngguy
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:08 pm | Permalink |

              The truth can be construed as “trolling” by some who do not want to acknowledge it.

              • Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:37 pm | Permalink |

                I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to agree with this one. Everyone who disagrees you assume don’t have access to TPG or other infrastructure for cheap Broadband and you have yet to show evidence that you even read the article.

                • sumyngguy
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:28 pm | Permalink |

                  If people had access to competition they wont be here whinging. I’m just clearing the air, providing the facts.

                  There really is no problem, if I want broadband, I can get it from a myriad of competitors trying to get my business offering very good products, I can do everything that todays applications require inc. online gaming, video download etc etc. That is the argument.

                  1- I have access to affordable quality broadband
                  2- the above offerings allow me to do everything that the internet entails from a global perspective.

                  Now, how am I disadvantaged from anywhere else in the world? Where’s the problem?

                  • Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:40 pm | Permalink |

                    Repeating the same baseless assumptions about NBN supporters here does not change the reality of the situation.

                    Let me tell it to you AGAIN: supporters of the NBN are not all from underprivileged areas that do not have access to Broadband competition from providers such as TPG and iiNet.

                    If you need an example to counter you assumption: here I am.

                    • sumyngguy
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:21 pm | Permalink |

                      Okay so say you have TPG and iiNet and you live say 1km from Burwood exchange in Sydney, and you can get a pretty good 16Mbps download (ie. 2megabytes /s). But wait, becasue youre a netvirgin and whinger you want more, you want the govt to spend $43Bn on fibre for the whole country so you can up that speed to 100mbps, so you can download that stuff 5x quicker because you cant wait 15mins, you only have 3mins?

                      My advice to you, dont be a tight arse, pay for it yourself if youre a hardcore netgeekvirgin, and get a second line, it will only cost you an extra $60pm, get a decent modem, bond them together and you get twice the speed. Cos, Im sure the granny or the Indian dude with his 4 kids living next door do not need what you do.

                      So whose thinking only of themselves now?

                      • Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:00 pm | Permalink |

                        Who says I won’t pay for it myself? This isn’t about me.Again you’re making assumptions about my character and motivations.

                  • nonny-moose
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:30 pm | Permalink |

                    you arent clearing the air here, but projecting your own ‘facts’ onto the argument, to the detriment of all.

                    quit with it.

                    neither NK or i (at the moment anyway) appear to be in an underprivileged area. i will admit i have lived in such areas in the past though; try it yourself sometime. it can be an eye opener.

                    i ‘get all that i need’ from my current service. that doesnt mean i am not excited by the idea of accessing new services that arent practical for me now. and not just for me but many other sectors of society. Yes, the current system works, that doesnt mean there are no problems, or that it cannot be improved; and clearly there are plenty of areas where it can be improved. you even admit it yourself – for those hard done by the legacy effects of Telstra privatisation, for one. (as an aside, im curious, tho: how do you propose to fix competition, exactly, within the parameters of the system we have now, if not through the NBN?).

                    ive said it before im open to being convinced of alternatives but the way you are going about it is simply not going to convince me. cut the projections and ad homs and we might start getting somewhere.

                    • sumyngguy
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:23 pm | Permalink |

                      No youre just whingers like kids in the icecream van who only gets on scoop, but in the picture there is one with three scoops on it, but it costs $43Bn, but you gotta have that

                      • nonny-moose
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 8:19 pm | Permalink |

                        #1 you reply to a request to quit the ad homs with an ad hom. if i could flag that post, i would. you really are bent on making this a no value discussion.

                        #2 its not whether i think i have 1 scoop or 3 scoops or want three if i think i have one. its actually more like what number of scoops is appropriate to give Australians, how to deliver it, and how much to spend. and which is the best technical solution to a next generation broadband system, in terms of lifetime and in terms of the commercial realities of the market – i.e. Telstra owns the current kit, basically, and anything you do with that has consequences.

                        for what it delivers the FTTN proposal simply hasnt yet been pitched in a way that cuts it. (very limited upgrade paths for FTTN, the bang per buck to individuals as well as the nation, the age of copper and its current lifetime (given Telstra said in 2003 we are at ‘five minutes to midnight’ (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/11/1071086169962.html?from=storyrhs). you will note we are 3 years from the first nominated timeframe of 10 years for 5 minutes….), cabinet resumptions where existing plant is inadequate).

                        and then you consider the business case. to pay out 46% of NBNco cost for only 40% served starts looking bad on the face of it, and it looks to only get worse the deeper you dig. 40% of NBNcos offering doesnt give so much room to make ones money back; though i note that aspect of the Coalition FTTN build is conspicuous by its absence. the silence is deafening.

                        oh and the 10-20 bn compensation to Telstra isnt included in the Coalition figure either.

                        it can be done better than its has been pitched, but lets not kid ourselves about this, the headline cost of the Liberal policy is not at all representative of the final cost of that network. context is everything and to throw out the now well worn 43B cliche without giving any equivalent context to the FTTN option is just not going to convince people. again, nor does leading with ad hominem attacks.

                        its has absolutely nothing about ‘whingeing for scoops’ and everything about looking at the actual merits of each option with as little ideological colouring as you can manage, because we are all going to have to live with the solution down the track, whichever way wins out: both major parties have some form of new or boosted network on the table. but i dont believe that the cheapest dollar figure offering is necessarily the correct one to go for. there needs to be a little more consideration of whats at issue than just a dollar figure.

              • Mike
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:41 pm | Permalink |

                “So they are just disgruntled broadband geek virgins” – Trolling

                If you want to put forward an opinion, try not to start it with a direct insult and a horrible assumption.

                Otherwise your opinion is ignored because of trolling and you make yourself look like an arse.

                • alain
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:35 pm | Permalink |

                  You will notice sumyngguy that the pro-NBN glee club are very selective on their use of the trolling label, only anti-NBN posters troll, if something like this is said:

                  “I ‘d suggest if you weren’t a Telstra stakeholder/fanboi and rabid Liberal voter you wouldn’t be here,”

                  … the selective filter is turned on and that sort of comment is ok because it’s from a pro-NBN poster.

                  Don’t worry about it sumyngguy, there is one aspect of most pro-NBN argument that has a common theme, the blatant in your face double standards.

                  • Beta
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:52 pm | Permalink |

                    LOL speaking of selective…

                    To complete my sentences fully…

                    “And I ‘d suggest if you weren’t a Telstra stakeholder/fanboi and rabid Liberal voter you wouldn’t be here, would you?

                    See, we can both make assumptions! Only thing is, mine, I bet is pretty well spot on…”! {END}

                    It was an example alain, must everything be spelled out to you…!

                    • alain
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:12 pm | Permalink |

                      “Only thing is, mine, I bet is pretty well spot on”

                      You know this how?

                      • Beta
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:19 pm | Permalink |

                        Exactly the same way someyngguy does, of course…!

                  • Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:57 pm | Permalink |

                    I can refer you to a specific example that undermines your assumption here Alain.

                    http://delimiter.com.au/2011/11/15/disappointing-turnbull-hasnt-fleshed-out-his-nbn-plan/#comment-205605

                  • Mike
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:59 pm | Permalink |

                    Classy, alain, backup the guy calling anyone that is pro-nbn a geeky virgin.

                    Please also point out where I’ve stated my opinion on the nbn.

                    Please point out where I’ve stated my opinion on political parties.

                    Please point out where I’ve stated my opinion on telstra and its shareholders.

                    I didn’t even comment on his opinion, I commented on the mannerisms with which he made them. Please try and learn the difference.

                    • alain
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:11 pm | Permalink |

                      I see blatant hypocrisy in the use of your trolling label, or are you really objective about it and apply it to all posts irrespective if they are pro or anti NBN?

                      • Beta
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:13 pm | Permalink |

                        Sadly you see lot’s of things which aren’t and cannot see those which are…!

                        Perhaps this is simply a continuation?

                      • Mike
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:27 pm | Permalink |

                        As an example, I dont particularly like the way RS/Rizz/Pepe/Whateverhegoesbynow comments in a very snarky “LOL” tone.

                        But I feel that the frequent bans by Renai speak for itself. For the most part everyone else at least seems to have respectful responces. I dont feel the same way about most of that guys responses.

                        To keep things somewhat relevant, I dont support the liberals currently because I dont like Abbott as a politician. Turnbull on the otherhand I like, I just dont particularly like the way he has been going about things as of late.

                        I’m a fan of attention given to the telcoms sector and good telcoms policy, I dont care what party puts it forward, I feel like currently that is labor. In 2013, if Abbott isn’t the leader and they take a better stance on broadband policy, they will likely have my vote.

                        Notice how I put forward my opinion without calling anybody names?

                      • Beta
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 9:29 pm | Permalink |

                        Since you’re at, your thoughts on say, alain and someyngguy, Mike?

                        Please, pray tell.

                      • Mike
                        Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:57 am | Permalink |

                        My take on sumyngguy and alain?

                        sumyngguy is an obvious troll, I kinda said that near the start of the thread. This was further cemented by another comment on a different article about renai and his reporting.

                        alain seems to have a lot of knowledge, but is also a master of the duck and weave when being asked questions. Also seems to be stubborn as a mule when it comes to anything on here. I would say alain isn’t disrespectful, just frustrating to have a conversation with. (this isn’t a good trait alain :p)

                        As for you, you have many good points and try to hold alains feet to the fire, but you often come across as a little child to me. I often agree with things you say, and you make good points against alains comments, but you often go about it in what seems like school yard taunting.

          • Duke
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 3:33 pm | Permalink |

            I have had TPG broadband (max plan) in inner city Sydney, 100 metres from the newtown Telstra exchange, and now on the Central Coast (less than a kilometre from the Gosford exchange) and had/have equally good stats on both. I look forward to the introduction of the nbn here and would have back in Sydney.

            Kindly stop assuming the right to speak for me thanks very much…

            • sumyngguy
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:25 pm | Permalink |

              Heres an idea…hear me out,

              say if you want NBN , you pay for your own fibre. how’s that sound?

              Lets say we’ll bill you $4000 for it.

              Works for me, I dont want it, i’d spend that on a holiday. cheers.

              • Beta
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:31 pm | Permalink |

                What if I want a road or a school, do I pay more for bitumen or brick?

                • sumyngguy
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:10 pm | Permalink |

                  you dont se how that arugment is flawed?

                  • Beta
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:12 pm | Permalink |

                    You can’t answer such a simple question?

                • alain
                  Posted 16/11/2011 at 8:51 am | Permalink |

                  We already have broadband.

        • Beta
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:39 pm | Permalink |

          And look,

          Since one of them and another have magically appeared the comments have doubled…

          Thanks for proving my point.

          Ooh and I see you fled ZD when the easy questions (let alone the hard ones were asked)… and have as I suggested, returned here, to again, make not so subtle inferences to Renai to stop me answering you again…

          FFS man up!

          • alain
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:18 pm | Permalink |

            You just post no fact trolling rubbish that doesn’t even refer to the subject in hand, hence your continual bans, then when I respond to you it’s ‘waaa you are trying to get Renai to stop answering you’.

            ASIF you come close anyway!

            You got totally owned in ZDnet (again) a common occurrence and it’s waaa ‘conspiracy ‘ all over again.

            • Beta
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:50 pm | Permalink |

              Only in your dreams…

              You still have about 10 unanswered questions from me and at least one from almost every long term poster here…

              It must be sad leaving in an alter reality, where not answering and not having proof is your motto.

              • alain
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:18 pm | Permalink |

                Jeez it’s gone up to ten already , is that including all those that are a fiction and you make up as you go along or does it include all those that are a fiction because you selectively pasted them together out of context across websites and even different months and subject matter in total and utter despair to try and make a point that doesn’t factually exist anyway?

                LOL

                • Beta
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:22 pm | Permalink |

                  Yes 10 glad you admit it…

                  So start answering your claims and stop running and hiding!

                  • Posted 15/11/2011 at 2:24 pm | Permalink |

                    Close this thread down or I will close you both down.

                    Renai

                    • Beta
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:13 pm | Permalink |

                      As long as the treatment is equal to us both… I will take my medicine!

    7. roast
      Posted 15/11/2011 at 8:46 am | Permalink |

      “Reaction to the plan at the time and since has been mixed, with some commentators seeing a more competition-friendly appeal in the policy ”

      lol, you’re referring to yourself??? As some commentators have been saying great journalism.

    8. PeterA
      Posted 15/11/2011 at 9:45 am | Permalink |

      This is one of the reasons why I don’t like opposition parties.

      This report is basically based off nothing. The policy they are reporting on is not what is going to be coalition policy in the 2013 election. As made plainly obvious by the report. The policy has so many negatives, and most importantly no answers to those negatives.

      When I see someone attacking any policy, be it the NBN, be it the carbon reduction scheme, I would like to see 2 things.
      Their actual problem with the stated policy they are attacking. (in this case, the NBN is plainly too expensive and too focused on government rather than private spending is what I believe the coalition has a problem with).
      Now, I would like to see a **coherent** alternative. FTTN is an alternative, but it doesn’t solve the cost problem. someone has to pay 16 billion dollars. someone has to pay telstra for the use of their infrastructure.

      I haven’t read the report, I haven’t seen the fine details of the coalition policy, but I presume the 11 billion dollars to (effectively) take over the Telstra Infrastructure as part of the FTTP would be very similar for a FTTN rollout. is the 16billion dollars including that figure? Does it take into account that Telstra won’t be able to pull out the copper and sell it off? (will Telstra even do that?).

      The fact that I haven’t read it, is not something to take issue with. Because I haven’t even heard mention of these things in passing. Malcolm didn’t get up and say: “We think the current, or a similar deal with Telstra could be replicated/retained with respect to a FTTN network”. Perhaps the government is hoping Telstra will drop 5 billion on a capital city upgrade and the government will pick up the cheque on a regional rollout? – I haven’t heard any detail like this.

      I just don’t know what the coalition is proposing. The only thing I do know, is it will be: “What we have now”, “Something else”, “Almost certainly not FTTP”. Why could I support people who don’t provide me a practical alternative? They haven’t even tried to wave their hands at a practical alternative.

      • PeterA
        Posted 15/11/2011 at 9:47 am | Permalink |

        Just like to add that I said “opposition parties”, as during the Howard era Kim Beazley and various other Labor opposition parties had similar lack of policy during government. And I couldn’t stand them. They would complain, but have nothing as an alternative. This was not an attack on the coalition per se.

        • sumyngguy
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:56 am | Permalink |

          Why would there be a $11Bn Telstra compensation when FTTN does not require any of the Telstra infrastructure (unlike the NBN) ?

          • Daniel
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:49 am | Permalink |

            “sumyngguy
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:56 am | Permalink | Reply

            Why would there be a $11Bn Telstra compensation when FTTN does not require any of the Telstra infrastructure (unlike the NBN) ?”

            Where the hell did you get the idea that FTTN does not require Telstra infrastructure? The basic premise of FTTN is that it can use the existing copper cable as the lead in line to home & businesses. You remember that Telstra owns all those lines & they won’t give them up without compensation.

            • sumyngguy
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:07 pm | Permalink |

              I guess I got the idea because I used to design them for a living.

              All that is required is to –

              1- replace the cabinet/pillar with an active box on the side of the road. The fibre to the box could either be provided by leasing 2 fibres of the Telstra cable -or- it could be run there separate to Telstra.

              2- the copper tails which constitutes the end from the cabinet/pillar/node to the home will be Telstra, in the same way the ULL happens today.

              So none of Telstra’s infrastructure needs to be touched at all. All that really happens is that a box be installed on the size of the road replacing the cabinet or placed next to it.

              So, in essence the same regulatory framework could be applied as ULL. In addition some kind of structural separation of Telstra could take place. Either way, the consumer and competitor ISPs get immediate gain, if the Govt and ACCC strike a good deal with Telstra.

              • Beta
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:16 pm | Permalink |

                Now I’ve heard it all…!

                ROFL

                • sumyngguy
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:27 pm | Permalink |

                  Thats the truth in a nutshell.

                  • Beta
                    Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:50 pm | Permalink |

                    I stand corrected, “now” I’ve heard it all…

                    • sumyngguy
                      Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:30 pm | Permalink |

                      All little bit of your ignorance is now gone

                      • Beta
                        Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:47 pm | Permalink |

                        But sadly your complete ignorance is still 100% in tact.

              • nonny-moose
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:44 pm | Permalink |

                you left out the step where tens of billions get paid to Telstra for cutting their copper in two at the pillar.

      • alain
        Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:11 am | Permalink |

        @PeterA

        I just don’t know what the coalition is proposing. The only thing I do know, is it will be: “What we have now”, “Something else”, “Almost certainly not FTTP”. Why could I support people who don’t provide me a practical alternative? They haven’t even tried to wave their hands at a practical alternative.

        Can I ask you why you worried about this in November 2011? – the Coalition can do nothing until half way through 2013 at the earliest, nearly two years away, in the context of that timeline the Citigroup report will be out of date.

        The Communications policy scene in Australia is in a state of total flux because:

        1. Telstra has not been structurally separated and their proposal for separation before the ACCC has yet to be given a big tick, I suspect the ACCC will send it back saying ‘Have another go Telstra’.

        The structural separation approval ties in with the Telstra/NBN agreement directly to the point that if the ACCC requires major changes to what Telstra has specified how they want to structurally separate another shareholders meeting may have to be called.

        2. The deadline for structural separation completion is 2018, which is post the 2013 election and post the 2016 election, I repeat the deadline is 2018!!

        3. The NBN SAU which is in draft form has yet to be approved by the ACCC, there is lot’s of interesting conditions in the NBN SAU, it’s a good read, I am sure the ACCC will give all of them a long hard look and their effect upon infrastructure and wholesale competition in general and may hand it back ‘ Have another go NBN Co’.

        4. The shit has not hit the fan yet with the NBN rollout because so far it is in ‘cosy feel good selected residences only pilot mode’, that is it is a quasi-fibre rollout with PSTN fallback, when exchange regions ADSL/ADSL2+ access are switched off and also the HFC BB is switched off that’s going to the interesting time, the slightest hiccup in that mass migration will give the Coalition the 2013 election on a plate, it doesn’t really matter what their Comm’s policy is (assuming they have not already got that plate anyway).

        That’s why I say damming Coalition policy in 2011 is a wasted exercise, damming Coalition policy June 2012 is a wasted exercise as well.

    9. terry
      Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:26 am | Permalink |

      What they dont take in to account is the HFC plant. One thing is to upgrade the hardware to provide more bandwidth, the thing they dont consider is that the COAX cable plant is nearly at the end of its life and will start to soon deteriorate and become unrealiable.
      If our esential services are to be put on the coax, we need to consider that it needs to be replaced every 20-30 years. Essential services can not be put on a coax system as there are multiple single points of failure and the further back you live in the node, the single points of failure multiply.

      • sumyngguy
        Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:19 pm | Permalink |

        Fibre has 20-30yrs of operational life. It still works after that but its deemed degrading by then. But some people are claiming NBN’s fibre will last 50yrs – sure maybe in a LAB ENVIRONMENT, not in the REAL WORLD.

        Even if the NBN completes in 8-10yrs, it will in more than a decade be considered a rapidly ‘ageing’ network, the same thing the current copper network is being accused of.

        The Optus Coax HFC network is pretty much end-of-life, but the fact that NBN wants to pay a premium for it just to make the business case numbers work is just another indication of such wastage of taxpayer money driven by clueless politicans, of course they are buying a dud – lol all the way to the bank.

        • Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:39 pm | Permalink |

          Sources to verify these life figures? What happens to the cables over time in all three cases? Please enlighten us further.

          • sumyngguy
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:31 pm | Permalink |

            you have asked the question, now go forth and seek your own answer.

            • Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:43 pm | Permalink |

              No. It doesn’t work that way. You’re going to tell us some “facts”, then argue with anyone who disagrees it and even provide verifiable or direct evidence (I am of course refering to Mr Young), the burden of proof is actually on YOU to verify them.

              Don’t shift the burden onto me because you can’t be stuffed covering your own arse.

              • alain
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:45 pm | Permalink |

                @NightKhaos

                “Don’t shift the burden onto me because you can’t be stuffed covering your own arse.”

                Perhaps he has is gone back and read some of your posting history to learn how you do it?

                • Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:56 pm | Permalink |

                  Are you willing to provide a specific example here alain?

                  Are are you then also going to make the stupid assumption that I can’t improve over time? I wouldn’t be pointing out what sumguy is doing wrong here if I didn’t think he could improve, after all I have. I have read up on NBN, I have read up on debating styles, logic, fallacies, policy, economics. Everything I need to better serve me in this on going debate.

                  The only problem is the more I learn, the more pointless it all seems. Which is unfortunate because I’m very passionate about this issue.

                  I sometimes even try and help you from making an arse of yourself with logical fallacies and personal attacks, however unfortunate, for you, that goes largely ignored. A pity.

          • alain
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:44 pm | Permalink |

            Well I can enlighten you that the Telstra HFC is being left up for Foxtel, I am sure Foxtel will work well alongside NBN FTTH BB, in fact NBN FTTH works well alongside Telstra PSTN as a lot of pilot residences are using it for voice and backup in case something goes wrong with the FTTH. lol

            Perhaps they should re label one of the ports on the NBN ONT box PSTN fall back, the UNI-V port it’s not being used for anything.

        • Francis Young
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:48 pm | Permalink |

          Optical fibre is laid in durable, gel-filled tubing. British Telecom budgets for today’s optical fibre to have a guaranteed in-ground life of forty years, and probably a century, before it needs replacing.

          Yet fibre supports all future switch speed upgrades, which is what truly sets fibre apart from any copper-based rollout that will be superseded by the time it is deployed.

          $12 billion of the NBN budget would see this fibre laid as a national asset for the remainder of the 21st Century. Since its cost is fully recovered in a decade, it is crazy not to do lay the fibre now.

          • sumyngguy
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:32 pm | Permalink |

            And you know what type of fibre NBN is using? -and- you know how much this so called ‘gel filled’ fibre will ad the the cost?

            • Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:48 pm | Permalink |

              And you know that NBN Co isn’t using Gel filled fibre?

              He provided a specific example that undermined your assertion that “Fibre has 20-30yrs of operational life”. The burden of proof is now on you to prove that this specific example either doesn’t apply to the case of the NBN, and further then provide evidence that your original assertion does.

              • sumyngguy
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:39 pm | Permalink |

                Of course I do, they’re using the standard stuff everyone else is, with an operation life of 20-30yrs, thats the only stuff that is mass produced today and you can get at any reasonable price.

                I’m not going to debate the life of fibre, the stuff being new tech now could cost 2-3x more per metre and will take 15yrs before it gets to the right place, come back and talk to me then about laying a fibre network that will last 60yrs.

                • Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:02 pm | Permalink |

                  So you’re still not willing to provide evidence of your claim? We should just take your word on it?

        • Francis Young
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:55 pm | Permalink |

          NBNCo is not “paying a premium” for the 1990s copper that is HFC.

          Rather, it is paying a modest migration incentive per customer migrated to the HFC owner to increase the number of cheap-to-service city customers on NBNCo fibre. This has benefits to the cross-subsidy of higher-cost areas, of course, but also delivers an homogenous mass-market of 100% of premises in towns and cities all using fibre, with consequent service quality and economic benefits all down the line for users, developers, government and the nation as a whole.

          Not doing it would leave HFC stranded as the poor relation, because few will prefer 2011-grade HFC to FTTP in seven years’ time. (The HFC decommissioning is due after 2018.)

          • sumyngguy
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:34 pm | Permalink |

            I can see optus rubbing their hands together… So how much do you want to buy our dud HFC network for again?

            • Beta
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:46 pm | Permalink |

              So look in all seriousness…

              I will ask you the same question I have asked alain previously (still waiting for an answer)..

              If HFC is as you claim, a dud, why shouldn’t it be closed down?

              • sumyngguy
                Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:42 pm | Permalink |

                NBNCo is already being viewed as a cashcow, sure it should be closed down eventually say 5-10yrs, Optus today needs it to compete with Telstra, but its operational life is nearly over. But the crazy is thing is, or rather the savior for optus is the govt wants to take it off their hand and have deep pockets.

                sure it includes migration of their customers, but they’re hell not going to part with the network for cheap, its take it all or nothing, and btw, this is how much we want for it. *hmph*

                • Beta
                  Posted 15/11/2011 at 5:55 pm | Permalink |

                  So even though it’s a DUD, keep it going for another 5-10 years… sigh!

          • Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:49 pm | Permalink |

            Just for people to know. In Perth metro, HFC is only rolled out in a tiny portion of areas. So you can pretty much ignore HFC for Perth.

    10. Francis Young
      Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:25 pm | Permalink |

      Let’s get this straight, Mr Turnbull, CitiGroup, quoting your own recent public statements, has established that:

      You would spend $17 billion of taxpayer money to build FTTN to part of the country and FTTP to 2%, with no government-owned assets to show for it?

      AND receive no wholesale revenue stream to first recover the money spent, then generate cash for public coffers in perpetuity?

      AND you haven’t considered the cost of two Ku-Band satellites for blanket coverage of black spots?

      I’m also intrigued that CitiGroup quote the coalition as claiming that FTTN will deliver 50-60 Mbps off copper! This indicates an electrified and fan-cooled fibre-to-copper switch cabinet must be built every 100 m in every suburban street. How does this reconcile with Mr Turnbull’s alleged green credentials? FTTP networks use 80% less electricity per gigabyte than ADSL (cf. State of Ohio).

      Technologically, not only is your plan inadequate for cities, which must largely remain on ADSL in 2018, you have totally neglected regional Australia, despite having watched three regional electorates cost you victory in 2010 solely because of your failure to promise regional broadband.

      The coalition urgently needs to rethink its strategy here. Labor has a better broadband policy, which is the only thing most people like about it. Instead of trying unsuccessfully to rubbish the policy, you should simply adopt it. You will then avoid coalition voters having to choose between voting for the coalition and having broadband. Is this too simple for you to understand?

      • sumyngguy
        Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:34 pm | Permalink |

        Malcolm has a difficult job. He needs an alternate policy. Despite good rational economic sense, he must work with NBN’s plan and go backwards.

        His plan seems just like a watered down version of NBN. However, the only realistic solution is to drop the cost of the network dramatically, ie abandoning the FTTP technology, but given the current climate and hype over broadband, it would not be poltiically wise to be offering a solution that can be easily be shot down as ‘inferior’ despite being the only realsitic and feasible solution.

        The NBN is Labor’s brainchild. It has been created as an abstract idea, and it has been backed up by bogus feasibility and business studies. For now, and with the independents and greens holding the balance of power and the amount of PR that has gone into selling the NBN, Malcolm has little room to move if he wants to be seen as having an alternative policy. As for the price tag, both parties with massage the numbers to somehow make it work, but in reality this thing sinks under its own weight.

        • Beta
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:48 pm | Permalink |

          Bogus feasibility and business studies…???

          For god’s sake, if everyone had such nah, nah, nah conspiracy theories, nothing would ever get built.

          But I suppose you are one who still demanded a (bogus – sigh) CBA though…?

          Seems the best way to sum up your comments here is that the NBN is no good, because one side of politics (which you loathe) is building it and they have NFI about anything. Whilst you bask in the assumed radiant riches of vitamin d rays, emanating from the a**e of the others…!

          • alain
            Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:20 pm | Permalink |

            “For god’s sake, if everyone had such nah, nah, nah conspiracy theories, nothing would ever get built.”

            Well you know all about conspiracy theories eh?

            • Beta
              Posted 15/11/2011 at 1:55 pm | Permalink |

              Gee and you beg to the editor that I should be banned for trolling, off topic and impolite comments?

              Go back and read your’s, alain. Im sure you can only find oh, about two dozen per week for the last 12 months…!

        • Jason
          Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:48 pm | Permalink |

          cool story bro

      • DinoTerrific
        Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:52 pm | Permalink |

        I’m afraid they’d have to come out of the dark ages first and get their pride to come back down to earth. Apparently the NBN is some great white elephant that needs to be slain, infact it is the very reason they lost the last election and if they are not careful it may just cost them again.

        If they ‘get’ the message in time only time will tell, ow what a joy to see the NBN halted, destroyed then the oppositions broadband plan to be rolled out after 3years, in the mean time nothing done, nothing built, nothing at all !!!… atleast they will do what they do best, NOTHING.

      • alain
        Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:32 am | Permalink |

        “You will then avoid coalition voters having to choose between voting for the coalition and having broadband. Is this too simple for you to understand?”

        Didn’t seem to bother voters Coalition or otherwise last year at the 2010 election, each major party got exactly the same number of seats and a hung Parliament, requiring pork barreling horse trading with the Independents.

        • alain
          Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:33 am | Permalink |

          That’s was for Francis Young.

    11. Brendan
      Posted 15/11/2011 at 3:45 pm | Permalink |

      You’re all pretty much ignoring a pretty damning consequence of CitiGroup’s report.

      Turnbull isn’t responding with “you are wrong, here is why..” he’s responded with (in essence) “how dare an external party hold me accountable for a plan when I haven’t damn well figured out how much it will cost, whether I’ll get a CBA for it or even exactly what it is yet”.

      I called Malcolm Turnbull out on twitter over the weekend. I asked, directly, is it his policies cost and model a secret or did he care to set the record straight. And I wasn’t the only one asking. A lot of people asked him to respond with something of substance.

      Response? Silence.

      I guess he’s from the same political school as Abbott, if it’s not written down, it doesn’t exist. And ignore anything he’s categorically stated in previous televised events, they are just imaginary (carbon tax, anyone?).

      He had an opportunity to sell his policy over the weekend and into this week. When it mattered. When people might have actually listened.

      He chose to remain silent, apart from responding to citigroup with “tell ‘em they’re dreaming”.

      • alain
        Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:21 pm | Permalink |

        Well a lot of people have asked Conroy and the NBN Co for a proper CBA on the NBN as well, but that is also met with silence, I assume it is better quality of silence.

        The question has also been asked what the retail dollar figure will be for a NBN voice only plan that matches the cheapest available on PSTN, once again that better quality of silence comes into play.

        • Noddy
          Posted 16/11/2011 at 9:38 am | Permalink |

          I believe I answered you a number of times. ISPs by their nature of their business don’t offer phone only plans. I am surprised Optus didn’t offer a voice only plan. I also posted that I found a iPrimus phone only plan for $24.95 for unlimited local and national calls. $2 over the $22.95 but not bad and it’s the fist voice only plan released that I know of.

          • alain
            Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:24 am | Permalink |

            Are you Brendan as well? – first of all as you well know but you keep ignoring, I am referring to NBN Co voice only costing off the UNI-V port on the NBN Co ONT box that sits inside the residence providing a voice only service off the UNI-V port and that residence does not want NBN BB of any description speed or quota – got it?

            The Primus plan is VoIP.

            • Noddy
              Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:50 am | Permalink |

              No, I am not Brendan. Could you please try to be a bit more polite in your reply, thankyou.

              I have no idea what the costing of a UNI-V port is as I don’t believe they have released a price. I have never seen you mention it in regards to a cheap phone plane.

              http://www.iprimus.com.au/PrimusWeb/HomeSolutions/FibretotheHome/

              It doesn’t state how the plan is delivered. Since the options are bundled, broadband, phone I took the phone to be independant of the broadband service. I did not realise it is VOIP, if that is the case it would be require a broadband plan and should be ruled out. iPrimus should look at how they present their plans.

              • alain
                Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:18 am | Permalink |

                “Could you please try to be a bit more polite in your reply, thankyou.”

                Oh I see that is your not so subtle false plea to Renai because you are still smarting from previous post deletions elsewhere in other discussions, my reply was polite as my original question was to Brendan not you anyway.

                • Noddy
                  Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:46 am | Permalink |

                  I am not appealing to Renai for anything. I just do not want to be drawing into some slanging match as I have in the past, it isn’t something I enjoy. I am just asking you to be a bit less condescending in the wording of your replies. I am not an idiot and don’t think I should be talked to as if I am one, thankyou.

            • Noddy
              Posted 16/11/2011 at 12:24 pm | Permalink |

              I called iPrimus to clarify their NBN phone plan. It is indeed a UNI-V based plan. They assure me it is a stand alone product and I just plug my existing phone into the phone port on the ONT box.
              Since I am not in an area getting NBN it was for a “friend” in Baccus Marsh I called. Someone without a computer who was worried they will have no phone. They said that when the NBN comes existing customers will be able to port their existing phone plan and number to fibre. I tried to ask if this would be the case with the Telstra budget plan, that just got a response that they didn’t offer Telstra plans and how their $24.95 plan was way better, it has… etc, etc.

    12. Posted 15/11/2011 at 4:44 pm | Permalink |

      So many of the same posters accusing each other of “straw-man” arguments and trolling.

      People, grow up and argue the facts and try and leave politics out of it. Look at what solution is best from a technological and financial point of view.

      Sniping at each other should be beyond you. If someone trolls, ignore them. If someone cant argue well, leave it alone, you may be surprised that some of us can spot weak arguments without having to have someone point them out to us!

    13. Paul Krueger
      Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:33 pm | Permalink |

      Just to state my situation. I am on TPG unlimited, 10 minutes from the center of Brisbane. I also have the option of Bigpond Cable.

      I don’t see how the coalition spending $17 billion dollars is cheaper when none of that spending remains in the gov hands. That is a $17 billion dollar gift, most likely to Telstra.

      The NBN is being paid for by customers on the network, repaying all gov borrowing. And the Gov (that’s you and me) retains total ownership.

      Do you really believe it will be cheaper on Telstra’s FTTN then existing ADSL plans (which the NBN looks like matching or bettering) when ADSL lines were built decades ago?

      While FTTN may promise 40 or 60 mbs-1 what is the MINIMUM SPEED?

      With the NBN anyone in a fiber area can sign up to a 100mbsec plan and get that. When it is time for more speed they can replace the hardware at each end (the cheap part) and a gig or faster would be easily achieved. You could make a very good case that even with the current hardware 1gig would be possible, for everyone, with little contention.

      It must be galling for the coalition to continue pushing their cart of sh!t when they know how superior the NBN is. I do not know how they managed to put themselves in this situation. When the next election arrives, and half a million people are connected to the NBN all their FUD will seem foolish, because we will all know someone on the NBN, enjoying speed and whichever retail service they choose.

      • Beta
        Posted 15/11/2011 at 6:46 pm | Permalink |

        “I don’t see how the coalition spending $17 billion dollars is cheaper when none of that spending remains in the gov hands. That is a $17 billion dollar gift, most likely to Telstra. The NBN is being paid for by customers on the network, repaying all gov borrowing. And the Gov (that’s you and me) retains total ownership”.

        Agree 100% Paul.

        Unfortunately however, instead of the NBN being viewed as either beneficial for Aussies or otherwise, by the opposition and their supporters, it is simply an us vs. them ideological fight.

        Gifting $17B of our tax dollars (whilst hypocritically calling the NBN, which will repay itself, a tax payer impost) to private enterprise, to deliver a vastly inferior network, which will need to be upgraded sooner rather than later, is viewed more politically ideological, than a “commie” government built network.

        Sadly, regardless of even benefits for themselves and their own families and friends, some will simply argue against it because of these ideologies and their political partiality…as witness graphically today by a new/”old face” right here!

      • deteego
        Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:28 pm | Permalink |

        What makes you think giving the government the money is any better off then the private industry, they are both just as bad

        • Noddy
          Posted 16/11/2011 at 12:27 am | Permalink |

          I would have to agree there. I wrote an overly long post about it in another thread. Government companies/departments tend to grow fat and lazy unable to trim the fat to achieve cheap pricing. Private enterprise goal is to achieve maximum profit and if they are an monoply or aren’t tightly enough regulated have no incentive to drop prices or provide a service to less profitable areas. Maybe the Salvos need to the network. Humanitarian and thrifty.




    Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:


  • Enterprise IT stories

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

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

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

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

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

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

    • Ministers’ cloud approval lasted just a year reverse

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

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

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

    • Turnbull outlines Govt ICT vision turnbull-5

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

    • NZ Govt pushes hard into cloud zealand

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

    • CommBank reveals Harte’s replacement whiteing

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

    • Jeff Smith quits Suncorp for IBM jeffsmith4

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

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

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

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

    Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp

    More In Enterprise IT


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

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

    More In Telecommunications


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

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

    More In Industry


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

    Will Netflix launch in Australia, or not?

    More In Digital Rights