• Enjoy the freedom to innovate and grow your business


    [ad] With Microsoft Azure you have hybrid cloud flexibility, allowing your platform to span your cloud and on premise data centre. Learn more at microsoftcloud.com.

  • IT Admin: No Time to Save Time?


    [ad] Do you spend too much time patching machines or cleaning up after virus attacks? With automation controlled from a central IT management console accessible anytime, anywhere – you can save time for bigger tasks. Try simple IT management from GFI Cloud and start saving time today!

  • Free Forrester analysis of CRM solutions


    [ad] In this 25 page report, independent analyst house Forrester evaluates 18 significant products in the customer relationship management space from a broad range of vendors, detailing its findings on how CRM suites measure up and plotting where they stand in relation to each other. Download it for free now.

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


  • Reader giveaway: Google Nexus 5


    We’re big fans of Google’s Nexus line-up in general at Delimiter towers. Nexus 4, Nexus 7, Nexus 10 … we love pretty much anything Nexus. Because of this we've kicked off a new competition to give away one of Google’s new Nexus 5 smartphones to a lucky reader. Click here to enter.

  • News, Telecommunications - Written by on Tuesday, December 3, 2013 10:16 - 218 Comments

    Get on with FTTN job, Quigley tells NBN Co

    quigley1

    news NBN Co founding chief executive Mike Quigley has advised the company’s new management to get on with the job of fulfilling the Coalition’s Fibre to the Node vision for the project and not to politicise it further, in his first public appearance since retiring several months ago.

    A former Alcatel-Lucent executive of long standing, Quigley led NBN Co from mid-2009, when he was appointed as its first employee, through to the September Federal Election. Slightly after that point, he retired, with the Coalition appointing former Telstra and Optus chief executive Ziggy Switkowski to fill his shoes temporarily as executive chairman, until a permanent replacement is found.

    Last night, Quigley gave a wide-ranging speech to TelSoc, a society focused on the telecommunications industry which hosts regular networking activities and lectures. At the event, held in Telstra’s offices in Sydney’s CBD, the executive was presented with the Charles Todd Medal for his services to the industry.

    At the event, constituting his first public appearance since leaving NBN Co, Quigley gave a wide-ranging speech reflecting on his time at the company. Delimiter intends to publish further detailed extracts from the speech, which goes into detail about what Quigley feels NBN Co has accomplished in its first four years of existence.

    However, perhaps the most topical aspect of Quigley’s speech was saved for his conclusion.

    Much of the debate over the NBN has focused on the different rollout models proposed by the two major sides of politics. Labor favours a universal fibre to the premises model, which is the technically superior option, although it is slow and expensive to deploy. The Coalition is likely to modify that model to extensively use technically inferior fibre to the node and to the basement technology, which is faster and cheaper to deploy.

    In concluding his speech, Quigley said if could offer some advice to NBN Co’s new management, it would be to focus on the task ahead regardless of NBN Co’s specific rollout model, because it had very little time to get its job done.

    “The NBN is not a typical incremental project being undertaken by an incumbent telco,” the executive said. “In a country like Australia no telco would undertake this job without government involvement. So it truly is a national investment.”

    “Whether you build an FTTP network or an FTTN network, there are risks either way. You can run the risk of building more than Australians will want or need in the future. Or you can run the risk of building less than they may want or need. This risk exists because an FTTN network cannot easily be upgraded to FTTP in an NBN environment.”

    “Do I personally think that an FTTP network is a better technical and economic option and a better investment for our country? Well of course I do. But that is now irrelevant. Are there going to be challenges in implementing an FTTN policy as described? Of course there are. But no doubt work-arounds of one sort or another can be found.”

    “If I could offer some advice to the new management of NBN Co, I would say: Even with all the work that has been done on the Transit, Satellite, FW, Greenfields, OSS/BSS, Product and Pricing and SAU, and the fact that you have a fully functioning company at your disposal, you do not have a minute to lose.”

    Telecommunications analysts such as Paul Budde have interpreted comments by Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull over the past several months that the Government was open to different NBN rollout models as the Minister having given NBN Co “the opportunity to save the current NBN”.

    “Do not waste your time being party to a re-writing of the FTTP business case using nonsensical assumptions aimed to prove a pre-determined outcome,” Quigley said last night, according to speech notes seen by Delimiter. “That will only further politicise the project and ultimately delay you.”

    “Even though I live in the middle of Sydney, my current peak speed on my ADSL2+ service is about 8Mbps. An increase to 25Mbps by 2016 and to 50 Mbps by 2019 would be an improvement. So, like many other Australians, I do hope that NBN Co, under its new management, can make that happen for me.”

    opinion/analysis
    I wholeheartedly agree with Mike Quigley here. Australian politicians and the technology industry has spent most of the past decade tearing each other apart on what the right rollout model is for the NBN, and the project has become increasingly politicised around this issue. But what is important — as countries such as the UK are showing — is not necessarily what rollout model is the correct one. After all, both have been successful internationally, and FTTN can ultimately be upgraded to FTTP down the track.

    What is important is that everyone involved with the NBN is pulling in the same direction to make the project as a whole move forward with speed. Quigley’s point — and it’s a point I strongly agree with — is that NBN Co’s staff must focus on implementing the policy which the Government has decided on, even if they personally disagree with it. It’s a very valid point, and one I encourage everyone involved in this process to take on board.

    Personally, I am very much over the FTTN versus FTTP debate. I just want the NBN project as a whole to pick up a head of steam. Like Quigley, I personally will be very happy to be receiving broadband speeds of 50Mbps by 2019, as I suspect most Australians will be. We can have a national debate after that point about FTTP upgrades. But right now, what’s important is getting this job done.

    Image credit: NBN Co

    submit to reddit

    218 Comments

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

    1. Non Puto
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 10:55 am | Permalink |

      I think that most here are realists and want an improvement to Australia’s telecommunications network and the best way for that to happen is to depoliticise it, maybe we should ask Santa for that for christmas?

      Pleas Santa,

      For Christmas I would like an NBN installed based on an ideology of “most appropriate technology” for Australia’s current and future needs.
      Please have this accomplished in a bipartisan environment to enable a more efficient installation process.

      Thanks
      hopeful

      Do you think that it will work?

      • GongGav
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 11:27 am | Permalink |

        Here’s the catch. Our current needs would favor FttN (really, right NOW we dont need more than 25 Mbps), and our future needs depends on how far into the future you’re refering to. Pre 2019, FttN will clearly deliver our needs, post 2019, not so much.

        I’m very much pro-FttH, but am realist enough to understand that short to mid term, FttN would be an improvement. My issue is that the improvement it gives isnt worth the cost. $29.5b for something that gives a benefit for between 0 (if you get FttN in 2019) and 10 years (if you got it today) isnt something that should work well with a Government supposedly looking at cost savings.

        If they are realistic about that goal, the cost to Government for FttH versus FttN ($30.4b over 11 years [2010 to 2021] v $29.5b over 6 [2013 to 2019]) would show that the savings are actually with the “more expensive” model. $2.8b per year of rollout v $4.9b per year.

    2. Alex
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 11:10 am | Permalink |

      This article has lost the point of the “whole FTTN vs. FTTH” “debate”. The fact of the matter is the government wants to rollout an inferior network that Australians DO NOT WANT.

      The take-up rates for FTTN in other countries have hovered around 10%. That is a complete waste of money. Here in Australia our new partially built FTTH network has achieved take-up rates for higher.

      What is also absent from this article is that methods to dramatically speed up the rollout had been drafted by Quigley before he left.

      The economic case for FTTH is here to stay.

      However, we should note beyond the politics this government is doing things that are blatantly against our national and personal interests. We should not be sitting here letting them do it.

      • Ryan
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 2:16 pm | Permalink |

        What are you proposing that you do considering that work choices has been the only thing to get more than a few Australians motivated enough to get off their backsides and protest?

      • Alex (NBN)
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 3:16 pm | Permalink |

        Looks as though I’ll have to add the NBN again as there’s a new Alex in town…

        :)

    3. Brendan
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 11:56 am | Permalink |

      Realistically, a split of FTTN, FTTH and FTTB will get the job done.

      I do, honestly believe that FTTH should be considered the first option, falling back to FTTN and FTTB when it makes sense. This has the benefit that some areas within the Wireless footprint, may be able to access VDSL services instead. It also means areas that may be incredibly slow to receive fibre can move to FTTN in the interim.

      The no-mans land that NBNco is in at present is crippling and really needs to stop.

      However. The reality is that to include FTTN, is to include Telstra. This is a non-trivial change and will be one of the biggest challenges to the entire project. It will entirely stand or fall based on how Telstra decide to engage – and I am sure they are aware of that.

      What I want to see, really, is Turnbull getting on with the job. He’s had an entire term to bitch at NBNco and Labor; times up – get on with it.

      It is good to see that Labor, after virtually collapsing post election – is now coming out of the gate and confronting the Coalition. The Senate is going to be a worrisome place for Abbott for some time yet.

      This kind of vigorous debate and politic will help ensure the Coalition are kept just a little more honest. If we all just roll over, then there’s no pressure on the minister, or his department to do the best job they can.

    4. Coaloid
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 12:09 pm | Permalink |

      Renai “I wholeheartedly agree with Mike Quigley here… After all, both have been successful internationally, and FTTN can ultimately be upgraded to FTTP down the track.”

      Quigley “Or you can run the risk of building less than they may want or need. This risk exists because an FTTN network cannot easily be upgraded to FTTP in an NBN environment”

      Well, you sort of agree.

      • Shannon Green
        Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:28 am | Permalink |

        Hmm – I saw that too. I do think this is a serious issue. We don’t get too many chances to spend around $30B. I doubt we will be allowed a ‘redo’. So taking the time to consider which methodology is quite a good use of time. Since it cannot be undone, and since FTTN CANNOT be easily upgraded down the track.

    5. steve
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 12:27 pm | Permalink |

      Non Puto, the question is what is the most appropriate technology” for Australia’s current and future needs.

      When the NBN released its first corporate plan in 2011, 79% of households connected to the internet via fixed lines (DSL, cable or dial-up) while 16% connected via wireless (mobile broadband, satellite, fixed wireless) (ABS 8146.0 – Household Use of Information Technology, Australia, 2010-11)

      Since June 2010, according to the ABS’ June 2013 report:
      1. The total proportion (households + business/government) of wireless broadband subscribers increased from 36% to 51% while the total proportion (households + business/government) of fixed-line subscribers dropped from 58% to 49%.
      2. There are now 6.1 million fixed-line subscribers, 6.3 million wireless broadband subscribers and 19.6 million mobile phone internet subscribers (households + business/government)
      3. The number of mobile phone internet subscribers increased by 13% to 19.6 million in just six months to June 2013 .
      4. Fixed line household subscribers have fallen from 79% to 34%

      From the ABS data, there are now 3.4 million household fixed-line subscribers and 10 million Australian households. So user preferences have changed radically in 3 years and may change again in the next 3 years.

      • Brendan
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 12:39 pm | Permalink |

        Remembering that these numbers don’t representatively include non-internet fixed line services, or don’t seem to have a clear distinction for multiple-service users.

        They do reflect that saturation of the market means that fixed line growth is basically tied to greenfield and general renewal. Something echoed by ISP operators on occasion. Many have diversified as the fixed line market reaches saturation. That’s not really new there.

        Telstra claim 8 million ‘fixed line’ services as of 2012.
        http://www.telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/company-overview/fast-facts/

        Wireless isn’t going to be a replacement for fixed line for a long time yet. So whilst there is a very strong uptake of wireless services, fixed line isn’t going away any time soon.

        Remember NBNco isn’t effectively building for just the growth curve, it’s meant to be a full infrastructure replacement; or at least – that was the initial goal.

        • steve
          Posted 03/12/2013 at 4:21 pm | Permalink |

          Brendan, true, the data does not have a distinction for multiple-service users – but multiple-service users do not explain the 6 million difference between fixed-line household internet subscribers and total households.

          Telstra claim 8 million fixed line services. The 4.8 million DSL + dial-up subscriptions across households and business/government are included in the report. This leaves 3.2 million fixed lines that are not used for Internet access, probably used for security systems, alarms, or voice telephony. This also does not explain the 6 million difference between fixed-line household internet subscribers and total households.

          • PeterA
            Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:25 pm | Permalink |

            What about irc subscribers?
            What about data use, you have subscribers there, but your figures don’t show the distribution of data across subscriber mediums.

            I think you’ll find that growth in fixed line usage in terms of data volume exceeded growth in mobile data. Without checking the numbers, I would estimate that the growth in fixed line usage by itself would equal the total wireless usage in Australia today

            Do that and tell me the future of the internet, and demand of internet is wireless.

            • steve
              Posted 03/12/2013 at 8:18 pm | Permalink |

              Wireless alone isn’t the future of the internet and neither is fixed line. For businesses, government and many households they are complementary services.

              But the ABS data indicates that for an increasing proportion of households it is more than a complementary service. This affects fixed-line revenue and subscriber forecasts.

              • Harimau
                Posted 04/12/2013 at 12:32 am | Permalink |

                Your reading of the data is not correct.

                3 facts:
                - The number of mobile wireless connections has climbed rapidly. (5862k in June 2012, to 6150k in June 2013)
                - The number of fixed line connections has grown slowly. (6040k in June 2012, to 6063k in June 2013)
                - Households can have one fixed line connection and one or more mobile wireless connections.

                What can we conclude?
                1. People are taking up more fixed-line services.
                2. People are taking up more mobile wireless services.
                3. Many of the same people/households are taking up additional mobile wireless services as already have fixed-line services and existing mobile wireless services.

                What can’t we conclude?
                1. An increasing proportion of households is wireless-only… because… they could (for example) be entirely internet-free.

                • steve
                  Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:23 am | Permalink |

                  There are 3.4 million household fixed-line subscribers and 10 million households

                  You are right to say that we cannot conclusively conclude that an increasing proportion of households is wireless-only. There are 3 possibilities:
                  1. An increasing proportion of households are wireless-only or
                  2. An increasing proportion of households are internet-free or
                  3. Something else is happening

                  However, whether the 6 million households with no fixed-line internet subscription are wireless-only or internet-free, the fact is that they are not accounted for in the key leakage assumptions underpinning the NBN Co. business case and revenue forecasts.

                  Other circumstantial evidence we have is:
                  1. The proportion of fixed-line subscribers fell from 58% to 49% while the proportion of wireless broadband subscribers increased from 36% to 51% between 2010 and 2013 (2010 was the previous ISP census by the ABS)
                  2. Mobile phone internet subscribers increased from 8.2 million to 19.6 million between 2010 and 2013. Mobile phone internet downloads increased from 4TB to 20TB
                  3. The last Household Internet and Computer Access report from 2010-2011 found that 79% of Australian households had access to the internet at home

                  So while it is possible that between 2011 and 2013, the proportion of households with access to the internet at home fell from 79% to 34% while the remaining 34% of households bought multiple mobile broadband and mobile phone subscriptions, anecdotally and logically it is fairly unlikely.

                  • Harimau
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:19 am | Permalink |

                    Where do you get these 3.4 million and 10 million figures?

                    Proportions are in fact of no value in this discussion. It is not circumstantial evidence – it is not evidence at all.

                    Let me show you another example.

                    In 2009, the number of fixed-line services in my house was 1, and the number of mobile wireless services was also 1.

                    In 2013, the number of fixed-line services in my house is 1, and the number of mobile wireless services is 4.

                    The proportion of mobile wireless services in my house increased from 50% to 80%!

                    You’re just misinterpreting the data. Based on your wilfulness, it seems like you’re doing it deliberately.

                  • Harimau
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:34 am | Permalink |

                    Your 3.4 million figure is incorrect at best. Deliberately misleading at worst (and if so, violates Delimiter’s comments policy). In 2010-11 there were 6.2 million households with broadband internet access according to ABS 8146.0. Only 16% of those indicated mobile wireless was their primary connection. Furthermore, a growth in wireless-only households today is in large part due to a failure in supply of decent fixed-line broadband (people on RIMs, no ports at the exchange, outside of range of the exchange, expensive cable, etc.), i.e. they have no choice, and not a strong reflection of future demand (i.e. future proportions of wireless-only households).

                    The fact is, until the next Household Use of Information Technology, Australia report comes out, you can’t make any sweeping generalisations about wireless-only households based on Internet Activity, Australia (which describes only numbers of subscriptions, irrespective of households). ABS 8153.0 shows that there is continued growth in DSL, meaning that people generally are not discarding their fixed-line connections, in fact more people are taking them up! You are incorrectly comparing two different data sets. I suspect you’re doing so deliberately.

                    • steve
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 12:30 pm | Permalink |

                      Wrong report. I’m referring to the June 2013 ISP census

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:15 pm | Permalink |

                        Oh yes… this one…

                        “Data downloaded by fixed-line broadband (629,964 Terabytes) accounted for 96% of all internet downloads in the three months ended 30 June 2013.

                        The volume of data downloaded by fixed-line broadband in the three months ended 30 June 2013 increased by 20% compared with the three months ended 31 December 2012. Data downloaded using wireless broadband recorded a 3% decrease compared to the three months ended 31 December 2012, to 27,232 Terabytes, however annual comparison shows an 8% increase.’

                      • Harimau
                        Posted 05/12/2013 at 2:31 am | Permalink |

                        June 2013 ISP Census is ABS 8153.0. Did you even check before you replied? I read both ABS 8146.0 (household use of IT, 2010-11) and ABS 8153.0 (ISP census, June 2013).

                        1) In 2010-11 there were 6.2 million households with broadband internet access according to ABS 8146.0. Only 16% of those indicated mobile wireless was their primary connection.
                        2) ABS 8153.0 shows that there is continued growth in DSL, meaning that people generally are not discarding their fixed-line connections, in fact more people are taking them up!

                    • steve
                      Posted 05/12/2013 at 10:11 am | Permalink |

                      “1) In 2010-11 there were 6.2 million households with broadband internet access according to ABS 8146.0. Only 16% of those indicated mobile wireless was their primary connection.”

                      The ABS 8146.0 2010-2011 report is worthless for 5 reasons:
                      1. It is 3 years old.
                      2. It is based on a sample survey, and relies on user knowledge, not comprehensive verifiable data
                      3. 62% DSL+16% mobile+11% cable = 89%, i.e. 11% or 900,000 households did not know their type of connection
                      4. A further 3% or 200,000) households did not even know whether they had broadband or dial-up
                      5. A total of, 1.1m out of of 6.7m did not know
                      6. According to the survey 21% said they did not have internet and 11% did not know what they had

                      The survey has 16% with mobile broadband, 16% did not know what they had, and 21% said they had no Internet at all. Yet the NBN corporate plan assumes 13% wireless-only and 75% take-up among households..

                      The NBN Corporate Plan has 100% take-up among businesses.
                      However ABS 8129.0 Business Use of Information Technology, 2011-12 shows that 8.1% of businesses did not have an internet connection, a further 1% did not have broadband and 19.4% of businesses cited wireless as their main type of broadband connection.

                      The ABS 8153.0 ISP census is not based on a survey. It’s accuracy is not based on user knowledge. There are no “don’t knows”. It is based on actual and comprehensive data from all Australian ISPs.
                      It shows 6.1m fixed-line connections among 11.4m premises as at 2013 i.e. only 53% of premises are connected to the internet via fixed-line.

      • grump3
        Posted 06/12/2013 at 2:32 pm | Permalink |

        Presently I’m forced to pay $40/month on top of my internet costs to maintain a useless phone service I don’t use as my VOIP audio is far superior yet barely adequate due to the limitations of my landline.

        Unless Turnbull’s “Faster & Cheaper” claim translates into the customer’s eventual experience rather than just to benefit the Government or Telstra agendas I suspect many of those nodes will be servicing far fewer than expected customers as we dump our landlines for alternatives.

    6. steve
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 12:40 pm | Permalink |

      Alex, we do not know what Australians want. What we know is that more households are now wireless subscribers than fixed-line subscribers.

      The NBN business case for a 30-year break-even in 2040 requires a 70% take-up of fibre among all households – if costs are within budget and the roll-out is completed on schedule. One of the key assumptions in the corporate plan was that wireless-only households would remain at 16.3% to 2025 and 16.4% to 2040. Latest ABS data indicates that this may not be the case.

      • GongGav
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 12:52 pm | Permalink |

        I thought that there were more wireless subscriptions than fixed line subscriptions. That doesnt necessarily mean more households. In a typical household, you have a single ISP connected for fixed line services. But every person has a mobile phone, sometimes two, each of which accounts for a wireless subscription.

        So in a typical household of 4 or 5 people, you’re going to see 4 or 5 wireless accounts, but 1 fixed line, so of course the numbers are going to be higher.

        But you will also find that most of those wireless subscriptions do most of their heavy internet usage on that fixed line service, whether its through downloading on their PC and syncing, or through a wifi connection to that home network. The same reports that show more wireless subs than home subs also shows that something like 94% of all downloading is done by fixed line services.

        If you’re going to use the wireless subscription arguments, please put some context on it, because there is always something left out. And in this case, the number of services needs to also take into account how much the individual uses that specific service versus fixed line connections.

        Wireless isnt the future. Not yet. What it is, is a complimentary service to fixed line. They work together, not in competition, and for now, fixed line is still the big brother of the two.

        *edit* I should also say that there’s nothing wrong with the stat you’re refering to, its more that it leaves out important context.

      • Posted 03/12/2013 at 1:03 pm | Permalink |

        Steve, You do realise that a lot of people have taken up a fixed wireless connection because they have no choice. ADSL is either not available or unuseable for a great deal of the country so they have to use fixed wireless if they want to use the internet.

        • Fibroid
          Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:42 pm | Permalink |

          There are a increasing number of residences that have their Telstra rented landline disconnected voluntarily and they rely totally on wireless for BB and voice, and that’s adequate for those users.

          It’s not about wireless being a replacement for high speed fixed line BB it is not, it is about where the revenue dollars and highest ARPU’s are coming from, it’s wireless, have a look at the latest SingTel and Telstra annual reports.

          Wireless substitution is not listed as a risk to revenue in the previous NBN Co Corporate plan for no reason.

          • Alex (NBN)
            Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:03 pm | Permalink |

            Just means FttN will fail all the more and quicker doesn’t it?

            • Fibroid
              Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:36 pm | Permalink |

              No, perhaps you could explain the well thought out argument why FTTN is more of a risk to wireless substitution than any other fixed line BB?

              • Alex (NBN)
                Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:46 pm | Permalink |

                Wireless isn’t more of a risk to FttN than FttP…

                FttN = fail… wireless as outlined by steve and his premise supported by you, will simply exacerbate this fail, won’t it, so you are claiming. Or are you about to do the old, typical contradiction/back flip…?

                Regardless, good boy again…

                Glad to see again you are finally awakening to the fact that Labor/Coalition… FttP/FttN… the same politics are involved and the same risks are involved…

                Wow old dog can learn new tricks…

                Perhaps you can explain why in the past you highlighted all these risks as steve did, in relation to FttP, but when I said they’d also apply to FttN you disappeared…?

                • steve
                  Posted 03/12/2013 at 7:54 pm | Permalink |

                  “Wireless isn’t more of a risk to FttN than FttP…”

                  Oh yes it is. A key assumption of the NBN FttP business case and revenue forecasts was that wireless-only homes would remain at 16.4% to 2040. So wireless was a critical risk.

                  The new NBN has made no such assumption. Until it does, it isn’t a risk. See the diffference?

                  • Alex (NBN)
                    Posted 03/12/2013 at 8:16 pm | Permalink |

                    Wow… you say “oh yes it is” (more of a risk to FttN) but then argue it isn’t and ask do I see the difference?

                    Que???

                    What I can see is a) your complete confusion b) until the Coalition says, you refuse to accept truth or otherwise… like the other naysayers

                    • Fibroid
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:29 am | Permalink |

                      Your conjecture doesn’t equal truth.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:42 am | Permalink |

                        Neither do your lies

                        :)

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:08 pm | Permalink |

                        Of which you never point out.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:49 pm | Permalink |

                        Just daily…

                        But you know what… I sadly actually think you believe your own lies, exactly as you are instructed to…

                        Pitiful really.

                  • Brendan
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 11:58 am | Permalink |

                    Steve, any numbers that affect FTTH, will naturally also naturally affect FTTN.

                    Depending on speeds offered, and costs, along with any reduction in footprint, the situation may actually be worse.

                    Wireless growth will always outstrip fixed, at this point. But they are not mutually exclusive and as a result the demand will remain for fixed line services of any type going forward.

                    You can’t simply claim “we don’t know” when any numbers you pluck out of thin air, based on your reading of the ABS stats will somehow have no relevance if copper is used, over fibre.

                    Honestly. That’s a logic fail.

                    • steve
                      Posted 05/12/2013 at 11:03 am | Permalink |

                      “Steve, any numbers that affect FTTH, will naturally also naturally affect FTTN.”
                      Not necessarily. The average capex per FTTH connection in the NBN plan is $2800. The average capex per FTTN connection is $900. This means that in order to make a return on the investment, FTTH ARPU must be higher and hence the end-user price must also be higher.
                      Reusing existing infrastructure e.g. the 3m homes already connected by HFC further reduces total capex and hence the pressure on price.

                      “Depending on speeds offered, and costs, along with any reduction in footprint, the situation may actually be worse.”
                      Sorry, what is the logic? A 3-4 times smaller investment per premise makes the situation worse? A smaller investment per premise means the ARPU is also reduced, which reduces pressure on pricing for cost recovery.

                      “You can’t simply claim “we don’t know” when any numbers you pluck out of thin air, based on your reading of the ABS stats will somehow have no relevance if copper is used, over fibre.
                      Honestly. That’s a logic fail.”
                      Firstly the numbers are not plucked out of thin air. The ABS data from all Australian ISPs shows there are 6.1m fixed-line premises as of June 2013. The NBN corporate plan is rolling to 11.4m premises as of FY 2013.
                      Secondly, the NBN Corporate plan assumes 100% take-up among businesses even though the ABS data shows 8.1% of businesses do not use the internet at all and 19.4% of businesses use wireless broadband as their main internet connection and 1% do not use braodband.
                      Thirdly, the NBN corporate plan assumes 13% wireless-only households remaining below 16,4% to 2040. However ABS data shows that already in 2010, 16% of households cited mobile wireless as their internet connection and a further 16% did not know.

                      You mentioned speed and cost. You forget mobility. A fixed connection allows connection to the Internet within your house. A wireless-internet connection can be used anywhere. The NBN Corporate Plan assumes 60-70% of subscribers on 25Mbps or below plans. These are comparable to LTE speeds but LTE can be used anywhere, the NBN can only be used at home. In addition, the LTE plan includes mobile voice calls, SMS, MMS. data and other mobile applications e.g. navigation, social media, casual photos, videos. At the moment the cheapest NBN Tier 2 plan on Whistle-out is $60, the cheapest 4G plan is $20 and includes $650 of calls (unlimited for intra-network phones), unlimited SMS and 1.5GB data. For the 5.4m households without fixed-line, which will be the more compelling choice?

                      And the NBN corporate plan shows ARPU going from $20 to $60 in 2021. What’s that going to do to prices and take-up?

                • Fibroid
                  Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:28 am | Permalink |

                  @Alex

                  ‘Just means FttN will fail all the more and quicker doesn’t it?’

                  So you don’t have a rational argument why this will be the case, it would much easier if you just said so.

                  • Alex (NBN)
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:46 am | Permalink |

                    LOL…

                    Contradiction much…

                    You were the one (and your new sound-a-like) previously telling us wireless would impact upon FttP..

                    I agree, but I don’t think the impact will be overbearing.

                    I also believe it will impact upon FttN…

                    Please explain why you have again flip-flopped by having different sets of rules for FttP/FttN and why wireless will only magically impact upon FttP…?

                    Go…

                    • steve
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:10 am | Permalink |

                      One track mind, much? It’s not FTTP vs FTTN. There is no FTTP. It was tried and failed “to meet a few targets” ….like a million households. It’s gone, cremated, just as when it was tried by BT and DK.

                      And there is no FTTN either.

                      What’s on the table is FTTP+FTTB+FTTC+FTTN+HFC+Satellite+LTE+VDSL2+G.vector + anything else that delivers the outcome quickly and cost-effectively.

                      And the impact of wireless is mitigated by simply making sensible assumptions as opposed to the nonsensical ones in the NBN corporate plan.

                      • Harimau
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:52 am | Permalink |

                        I’m curious why you think your untrained and uninformed assertions are “true”, and the NBN Co business plan formed by experienced well-informed professionals is “nonsensical”. Because Malcolm Turnbull said the same thing?

                        FTTN will drive an increase in the proportion of wireless-only households, as 4G will be able to provide higher speeds than FTTN, compared to FTTP. This is only considering the footprint of households where FTTP is slated to be replaced by FTTN. We are not considering other technologies’ footprints (e.g. cable, assuming it can be made open-access, and whether a shared connection technically meets Turnbull’s 25Mbps or 50Mbps minimums). FTTN for this footprint is a mistake.

                        However, the number of fixed-line connections in Australia continues to grow (ABS 8153.0), which indicates that the threat of large numbers of wireless-only households is either false or overstated.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 11:05 am | Permalink |

                        Well Mr pedantic, you feel free to use the full names if you feel it appropriate. I’ll continue to use the recognised FttP and FttN to simply differentaiate between the two plans *sigh*.

                        But seriously I see you were up until what 4am scouring the net and the best you could find were, you guessed it a few vague UK/BT links…

                        Speaking of which – you still haven’t answered my question and backed your own claim UK/Aussie comparison… that 10 million homes were passed with FttN by BT – so again, will Mal be able to achieve that here?

                        Yes or No, it’s not a trick question

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:14 pm | Permalink |

                        @Alex

                        ‘I’ll continue to use the recognised FttP and FttN to simply differentaiate between the two plans *sigh*.’

                        “FTTP+FTTB+FTTC+FTTN+HFC+Satellite+LTE+VDSL2+G.vector +”

                        They are all valid fixed line BB infrastructure and wireless BB terminology, what you personally ‘recognise’ is of no consequence, and I raise you a *sigh*and one *rolls eyes*.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:47 pm | Permalink |

                        So in future please refer to the Coalition’s plan in full…at every comment… i.e…

                        “FTTP+FTTB+FTTC+FTTN+HFC+Satellite+LTE+VDSL2+G.vector +”

                        AGAIN, I will refer to it as FttN for ease… because up until you and your mates latest pedantic exercise in futility and idiocy we all (including you) did and do refer to it as such….

                        *rolls eyes*

              • Alex (NBN)
                Posted 04/12/2013 at 9:06 am | Permalink |

                http://delimiter.com.au/2013/12/03/get-fttn-job-quigley-tells-nbn-co/#comment-631276

      • Harimau
        Posted 04/12/2013 at 12:43 am | Permalink |

        “What we know is that more households are now wireless subscribers than fixed-line subscribers.”
        We do not know that. In fact, that is false.

        In my own home, there are more wireless subscribers (two sisters, a brother, and me) than fixed-line subscribers (me).
        This is one household with multiple services.
        This is not “more households are wireless subscribers than fixed-line subscribers”.

        • steve
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:43 am | Permalink |

          Fixed-line subscribers also having multiple wireless subscriptions does not account for the 6 million fewer fixed-line subscribers than there are households

          • Harimau
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:40 am | Permalink |

            Where does your 6 million figure come from? I suspect it’s false.

            • GongGav
              Posted 04/12/2013 at 1:30 pm | Permalink |

              The reports he refers to a few times says there are 12.3 million internet connections, half of which are mobile wireless. And he’s right, there are 6.15m mobile wireless connections. But given the total number of subscribers from the report is more than there are households in Australia, somethings not right with his conclusion.

              The 2011 census shows around 9 million dwellings, so clearly there is double counting somewhere. Which is going to be a combination of multiple mobil phones in a house, and/or fixed line plus mobile phones. End of the day, its hard to see exactly whats going on, only that mobile subs ARE increasing, and that dialup is all but extinct, being only 2% of the total.

              Side note: What the…! 2%? Still? Guess its just part of my firm belief that adding in a stepping stone tier (like FttN) only continues the tradition of propping up technology well beyond its expiry date.

              Anyhow, the same report he mentions also looks at volume of data downloaded from access connections. Total of 657,262 Tb of information, with a massive 27,232 Tb from mobile broadband.

              So that 50% of connections, whether theres double counting or not, only accounts for around 4% of all data downloaded in private dwellings.

              • Harimau
                Posted 05/12/2013 at 2:58 am | Permalink |

                I’m aware of the numbers you pointed out (and I agree, he is repeatedly guilty of conflating subscriptions with households, ignoring the reality of multiple-services and mixed-services households). However, that’s not what he just now claimed, which he needs to defend.

                He claimed:
                “6 million fewer fixed-line subscribers than there are households”
                Put mathematically:
                X = number of fixed-line subscribers
                Y = number of households
                Y – X = 6 million

                Where does steve get this number, Y – X?

            • steve
              Posted 05/12/2013 at 9:13 am | Permalink |

              “Where does the 6 million figure come from?”

              NBN Corporate Plan total premises FY2010: 10.9m (9.6m residential, 1.3m business)
              NBN Corporate plan average growth in new premises FY2010 to FY2025: 177,000 per year
              Total premises FY2013 = 10.9m + 177,000 X 3 = 11.4m premises (10m residential, 1.4m business)

              ABS 2013 ISP census: 6.1m fixed-line subscriptions (Dial-up+DSL+Cable+Fibre)

              11.4m premises – 6.1m fixed-line subscriptions = 5.3m premises with no fixed-line internet

              • GongGav
                Posted 05/12/2013 at 9:58 am | Permalink |

                See, I’m liking Steve more than others because he backs it up with how he gets to a conclusion. May still disagree with the conclusion, but I dont think its a political bias like others.

                Steve, its still conflating the final numbers. You’re including business premises, which werent part of the 12m subscriptions total. If you include business premises, the number of sub’s goes up considerably, given every business runs multiple mobiles for staff, and pretty much every one has net access of one sort or another.

                Pure guess, but it would do something like show fixed line connections hitting ~7.5m and mobile connections hitting ~8.5m. But the report doesnt deal with businesses that I could see, only households. So you shouldnt include businesses in your statement.

                They should be considered separately, they are two different markets. For the point you’re trying to make, it doesnt actually change much if you use 10m households anyway, but 3.9m is a different argument than 6m.

                I’m personally wondering where they get the 10m figure from anyway. Last census showed an average of 2.6 peeps per house, and with a 23.3m population that comes out to a touch under 9m households.

                And given that its been widely reported that ~75% of households have broadband now, its nothing new anyway. Just on that, it might actually give a fair guesstimate on how many houses rely on mobile broadband only. If 6.1m out of 10m have a fixed line connection, and its around 7.5m that have broadband (which includes mobile wireless) then 1.4m or so rely solely on their mobile wireless. Or close enough to that anyway.

                The real question you’re trying to get to is where are the 2.5m that have neither mobile wireless, or fixed line.

                • steve
                  Posted 05/12/2013 at 11:47 am | Permalink |

                  “Steve, its still conflating the final numbers. You’re including business premises, which werent part of the 12m subscriptions total. If you include business premises, the number of sub’s goes up considerably, given every business runs multiple mobiles for staff, and pretty much every one has net access of one sort or another.”

                  GangGav: The 12.4m subscriptions do include businesses. the report breaks it up into 9.7 residential and 2.7m business/govt. Please read the full report.

                  So we still have 6.1m total fixed-line connections for 11.4m premises (both figures are total household +business/govt.)

                  In addition, another ABS report 8129.0 – Business Use of Information Technology, 2011-12 shows that 19.4% of business use wireless as their main internet connection and 8.1% do not use the internet at all

                  “I’m personally wondering where they get the 10m figure from anyway.”

                  The NBN plan used ABS figures reconciled with GNAF(Geocoded National Address File) which uses multiple sources including land records, Australia Post and the AEC, so its not plucked out of the air.
                  In any case, the point is that the NBN corporate plan is to roll to 11.4m premises on the assumption of 70% household take-up and 100% business take-up.

                  The ABS data indicates only 53% of total premises currently use fixed-line. So a 70% household take-up is fairly optimistic.

                  Another wrong assumption is that 100% of business will take-up subscriptions. But ABS data shows that 8.1% of business don’t use the internet and 19.4% use wireless.

                  “The real question you’re trying to get to is where are the 2.5m that have neither mobile wireless, or fixed line.”
                  No the real question is with 11.4m premises and 6.1m fixed line subscriptions, does it make sense to bet $45bn on a 70% take-up? Does it make sense to roll-out fibre at $3000 av. capex per premise to 5.3m premises who don’t use fixed-line internet?

                  $3000 x 5.3m = $15.9bn investment that is unlikely to be recovered, which means higher prices for NBN subscriber, higher funding required and higher interest.

    7. steve
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 12:59 pm | Permalink |

      Brendan, you’re right. Wireless isn’t going to be a replacement for fixed line for a long time and fixed line isn’t going away any time soon. Businesses, government and medium-heavy download users will always need fixed line services. The question is around household take-up. Household take-up has shifted significantly in the last 3 years from fixed-line to wireless.

      However the NBN’s 30-year business case is based on a heavy take-up of fixed-line fibre services (70% overall, after allowing for wireless-only, vacant and third-party premises). This was a reasonable assumption in 2009-2010 but needs a review in light of the new data on user preferences.

      • PeterA
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 11:33 pm | Permalink |

        Fixed line isn’t going away ever, because it can never ever ever replace or even slightly supplant, or shift or mediate bandwidth demand.

        Once a more equal distribution of fixed line broadband speeds (greater than an average of 4 for instance) then services which use it will become more prevalent (Netflix like).

        • steve
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:19 am | Permalink |

          PeterA, Fixed line isn’t going away ever, because it can never ever ever replace or even slightly supplant, or shift or mediate bandwidth demand.

          That’s true for businesses, government, you, me and many households. However for a significant number of households wireless does replace fixed line. The 2010-2011 ABS Household Internet Usage report found that 16% (1 million) households with internet access at home are connected by mobile broadband. Wireless-only households are identified as a key risk in the NBN Corporate Plan. Roy Morgan and Ovum research in 2011 found 13% (1.3 million) wireless-only households. A key assumption in the NBN Corporate Plan is that wireless-only households will remain at 16.4% to 2040.

          Also, http://blogs.informatandm.com/6424/lte-smartphones-potential-headache-for-ftth-operators/

      • Harimau
        Posted 04/12/2013 at 12:48 am | Permalink |

        It has not ‘shifted’. True, the number of ‘new services’ has ‘shifted’ (from fixed-line to mobile wireless: obviously, thanks to smartphones, 3G and 4G). But the number of ‘old services’ (DSL) has not reduced (in fact, it has increased). Does that make sense?

        Mobile wireless will never be a replacement for fixed-line services, it will however be complementary. There will be continued growth in both the fixed-line and mobile wireless sectors. The mobile wireless sector has greater room to grow (the number of people in Australia) than the fixed-line sector (the number of premises in Australia), so there will of course be greater growth in the mobile wireless sector than the fixed-line sector.

        • steve
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:58 am | Permalink |

          http://blogs.informatandm.com/6424/lte-smartphones-potential-headache-for-ftth-operators/

          • Alex (NBN)
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 9:02 am | Permalink |

            Seriously.. you supply a link to a year ago, before FttN was again officially on the table, to try to point the finger? Really?

            Having considered it closer IMO, wireless could possibly impact upon FttN more so than FttP.

            Why?

            Because if people can get as good or better than FttN performance (4G) it may sway them more so and sooner, to complete wireless. Whereas the added performance availability of FttP may sway them to not go completely wireless.

            But of course that makes sense and opposes your agenda so you won’t agree…

            • steve
              Posted 04/12/2013 at 9:48 am | Permalink |

              “Having considered it closer IMO, wireless could possibly impact upon FttN more so than FttP.”
              Only if the new business case uses nonsensical assumptions aimed to prove a pre-determined outcome, e.g. that there will not be any increase in wireless-only households for 30 years.

              And your FTTN or FTTP binary fixation is rather tedious, almost an OCD. It’s FTTx,, see? Get over it.

              That’s FTTP+FTTB+FTTC+FTTN+HFC+Satellite+LTE+VDSL2+G.vector + anything else that delivers the outcome quickly and cost-effectively.

              • Observer
                Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:07 am | Permalink |

                Please enlighten us with your definition of cost effectiveness.

                • steve
                  Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:28 am | Permalink |

                  Cost-effective : The option with the best opex+capex that meets the stated objective

                  • Harimau
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:56 am | Permalink |

                    The objective:
                    - Infrastructure that has the capacity to meet demand for at least 30 years.

                    • steve
                      Posted 05/12/2013 at 12:09 pm | Permalink |

                      “- Infrastructure that has the capacity to meet demand for at least 30 years.”

                      Whose demand – demands of the the top quintile or demands of the majority? Does your crystal ball show us universal average demand for 30 years?

                      In rolling out universal broadband do we consider the needs of the vocal 10% heaviest users or the bottom 80%, given that data shows 47% of premises don’t even have fixed internet and average data speeds are currently less than 4Mbps? Should the bottom 80% subsidise the top 10%?

                      The NBN corporate plan has 70% of subscribers on plans 25Mbps or lower to 2021 and 50% to 2040.

                      If 25Mbps can be rolled out in 3 years and 50Mbps in 6, should the majority of people on 4Mbps and less be forced to wait another 10 years so the demands of the loudest 10% are met, especially after already having waited 6 years for SFA?

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 05/12/2013 at 12:38 pm | Permalink |

                        One would surely, basically, estimate ‘future demands’, using past trends and existing formulae…

                        Referencing historical data as well as recognised laws… rather than hand picking a few mixed stats from different sources which together suit, whilst ignoring others which don’t suit, simply to argue for one’s desired outcome…rather than “genuinely wanting to ascertain the best/required outcome!”

                        Personally underestimating our needs would be more harmful than overestimating them, IMO…

                    • steve
                      Posted 05/12/2013 at 12:51 pm | Permalink |

                      I’d say the objective is to get the 80% languishing on 4Mbps or less to 25Mbps as soon as possible.

                      The NBN plan has 70% of its subscribers on plans 25Mbps and under. Even at 65% take-up of the NBN this means 80% of Australians need 25Mbps or lower.

                      All the way to 2030, NBN forecasts show 40% of subscribers on the 12Mbps plan, and 50% of subscribers on plans 50Mbps and under.

                      So why should the 80% majority wait on 4Mbps so that the minority can get 100Mbps in 10 years when the majority just needs an improvement on 4Mbps and will not need 50Mbps for at least the next 20 years? Why should the majority subsidise the demands of the minority?

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 05/12/2013 at 1:19 pm | Permalink |

                        Yes steve, coincidentally Mathew has been banging the same speed/percenatge estimations from the Corporate Plan for many years, regardless of the fact that in the real world, the stats he mentioned were actually being surpassed.

                        I also fid it most illogical too, that people who are quoted as claiming the previous NBN and NBNCo/Corporate Plan failed, will nonetheless, glady pinpoint a small number of figures contained within the Corporate Plan and likewise, a small number of Mike Quigleys quotes and use them as their cornestone facts (whilst bluntly dismissing all other figures/quotes) when it suits them… :/

                  • Alex (NBN)
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 11:12 am | Permalink |

                    I’d suggest going by the logic you have been displaying here, the answer to that would be the status quo…

                    Because of course the benefits are apparently, never of consequence.

                  • Observer
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 11:28 am | Permalink |

                    Which is?

                    • Fibroid
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:20 pm | Permalink |

                      $29.5b vs $45.6b.

                      • Observer
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:41 pm | Permalink |

                        Honestly, is the best you can come up with?

                        Nothing else matter? With one simple answer you have demonstrated the limitations of your thinking.

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:53 pm | Permalink |

                        Simple and to the point a very effective method, beats conjecture based padded waffle every time.

                      • Harimau
                        Posted 05/12/2013 at 3:07 am | Permalink |

                        [29.5b + cost of remediation of the copper + cost of leasing/purchase of the copper + maintenance costs + electricity costs + forgone revenue from HFC customers + forgone revenue from higher AVC charges under FTTP + forgone revenue from CVC charges under FTTP]
                        vs
                        [45.6b]

                      • Abel Adamski
                        Posted 05/12/2013 at 9:21 am | Permalink |

                        + $B for the copper, operational costs for that copper and HFC incl Cabinet maintenance and power, copper pair and joint maintenance , including operational and fault systems.
                        Either GIMPCo buys the entire division and associated systems and staff from Telstra along with the copper, or signs a long term multi $Billion contract with Telstra to provide those operational services
                        So $29.5B is a nice fanciful figure, achievable only by heavily loading the Opex meaning either increased customer costs for a lesser product or massive taxpayer subsidies without factoring in the cost to revenue of the cherry pickers and their mini monopolies.

                        The GFC was caused by Merchant Bankers flogging off junk bonds as AAA securities conning the investors and public in the process. Deja Vu

                        The NBN as planned is a purpose built Ubiquitous etc communications platform for the Nation for many decades ahead.
                        GimpCo when you analyse it is just a refurbishment and upgrade of an existind Telco network, in other words restoring us to where we would have been if the idiot LNP hadn’t privatised and flogged off an integrated Telecom. The private sector will provide for the Nations essential needs at the lowest cost.
                        Yeah sure

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 05/12/2013 at 9:30 am | Permalink |

                        Welcome back Abel :)

                      • steve
                        Posted 06/12/2013 at 2:03 am | Permalink |

                        Actually it’s FTTP $2,800 av. capex per premise (NBN Corp Plan) vs FTTN $900 av. capex per premise.

                        It’s FTTP $2,800 av. capex per premise vs FTTB ($2,800/no. of apartments) av. capex per premise

                        It’s FTTP $2,800 av. capex per premise vs reused HFC ~$0 av. capex per premise

          • Harimau
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:41 am | Permalink |

            Your link doesn’t respond to anything I commented.

            • steve
              Posted 05/12/2013 at 9:45 pm | Permalink |

              Harimau: “Mobile wireless will never be a replacement for fixed-line services,”

              http://blogs.informatandm.com/6424/lte-smartphones-potential-headache-for-ftth-operators/
              “Sources at NTT East and NTT West are unequivocal in their views that the biggest, single reason for the slowdown in FTTH subscriber growth is the fact that many young subscribers now prefer to have their own ‘personalised’ LTE broadband services rather than paying for a household-based FTTH service – in addition to which they would be paying for a Smartphone LTE data plan anyway.”

              “Sources at NTT East say that LTE subscribers seem to be adjusting their behaviour to fit with the realities of mobile broadband and that they are ‘snacking’ on video-clips and music on their Smartphones and Tablets rather than downloading multiple HD movies and engaging in the sort of behaviour they would on an FTTH connection.”

              Harimau: “the number of ‘old services’ (DSL) has not reduced (in fact, it has increased). Does that make sense?”

              Yes. Between 2010 and 2013:
              - Australia’s population grew by 961,295 (ABS)
              - total premises (homes + businesses) grew by 531,000 (NBN Corp Plan)
              - Internet connected households grew by 2,300,000 (ABS 2010-2011 trend extrapolated to 2013)
              - Internet-connected businesses grew by 101,700 (ABS 2011-2012 trend extrapolated to 2013)

              i.e. total new internet-connected premises grew by 2,900,000

              - Fixed-line connections grew by 120,000 (ABS)
              - Wireless connections grew by 2,720,000 (ABS)

              To summarise, between 2010 and 2013:
              * New internet-connected premises grew by 2.9 million
              * Total Internet subscriptions grew by 2.84 million (0.12m fixed, 2.72m wireless)

        • steve
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:39 am | Permalink |

          Harimau, “the number of ‘old services’ (DSL) has not reduced (in fact, it has increased). Does that make sense?”

          In 2010-2011, 13% (~1 million) of households were identified by the ABS, Roy Morgan and Ovum as wireless-only. Between 2010-2011 and 2013, fixed-line subscriptions increased by 400,000 but the number of households increased by 1.5 million. Wireless broadband subscriptions increased by 1.4 million and mobile phone internet subscriptions increased by 10 million.

          • Harimau
            Posted 05/12/2013 at 2:49 am | Permalink |

            steve, you’re failing to interpret the data correctly.

            16% of houses were wireless-primary in 2010-11 (ABS 8146.0). Fact.
            The number of wireless services have increased since then (ABS 8153.0). Fact.

            You have incorrectly concluded from these two facts that the proportion of wireless-only (or wireless-primary) households has increased. This is, at best, conjecture, and at worst, a lie.

            Furthermore, what you said does not address the part you quoted, that is:
            “the number of ‘old services’ (DSL) has not reduced (in fact, it has increased). Does that make sense?”
            This comes from the table in ABS 8153.0. The number of DSL services alone (not even considering the growth in fibre and other fixed-line services) increased from 4 632 000 to 4 787 000 in the year between June 2012 and June 2013.

            If, and only if, the combined number of DSL and other fixed-line internet services begins to reduce instead of grow, combined with sustained growth or steady maintenance in the number of mobile wireless services, can you reliably conclude that the number of wireless-only households are increasing. This has thus far not been the case.

            It’s time to admit you’re wrong.

    8. steve
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 1:07 pm | Permalink |

      GangGav, the critical point isn’t that there are more wireless subscriptions than fixed line subscriptions.

      The point is that there are 5 million more households than fixed-line household subscriptions. There are 3.4 million fixed-line household subscriptions and 10 million households.

      Each of the 3.4 million household subscribers having 2,3,4 or 5 additional wireless subscriptions does not change the fact that there are 5 million fewer fixed-line household subscribers than there are households.

      I agree that wireless isnt the future, not yet and that is a complementary service to fixed line. But perhaps for a significant number of households it is more than a complementary service.

      • GongGav
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 1:32 pm | Permalink |

        Steve, go to the ABS website and have a look at the reports first. They tell a notably different story.

        From their 2010-11 report, 2 lines in particular.

        In 2010-11, of the estimated 6.7 million households who had internet access, 92% had broadband internet access and 5% had dial-up access. The remaining 3% of households did not know the type of their home internet connection.

        In 2010-11, an estimated 6.2 million households had broadband internet access at home. The most common types of broadband connections were: DSL (used by 62% of households with broadband); mobile broadband (16%); and cable (11%).

        The measurements were against 6.7m households, the bulk of which (6.2m) had broadband. Of that 6.2m, they isolate to mobile and fixed, with an unknown 13% floating about that dont appear to have answered the question.

        Its that second line that I’m pointing to. Yes, 16% is significant. But as others have said, how many of those households have no option, and how many are totally by choice? I’d wager that the 73% that do use fixed line services are a touch more significant than something around 1/5th the amount.

        • steve
          Posted 03/12/2013 at 3:48 pm | Permalink |

          GongGav, wrong report. I’m referring to the June 2013 report, not the 2010-11 report. The NBN corporate plan was based on the 2010-2011 report.

          8153.0 – Internet Activity, Australia, June 2013

          • GongGav
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 1:38 pm | Permalink |

            Steve, fair point, but I’ve looked at the other report now and my post doesnt really change much. See above, but at the end the report shows 12 million connections, when there are only 9 million households in Australia. So there is clearly double counting somewhere.

            All it says to me is that 6 million people have smartphones. It doesnt show how many live exclusively off those smartphones (or laptops with dongles) but only that they exist. And are complementary to the 2/3rds of the households that have a fixed line.

            As I say above (FYI, thanks for making me chase that report out. I know where it is now) it also shows that the mobile wireless connections only download about 4% of all data. Very much making it a complementary service to fixed line – which we agree on :)

            Not saying your data is wrong, I’m saying your conclusions may be a little hasty. If there are only 9 million houses (as per 2011 census), think about what else 6m +6m may mean.

        • steve
          Posted 03/12/2013 at 4:04 pm | Permalink |

          P.S. the June 2013 Internet Activity report is based on actual subscriber data from all Australian ISPs, not a sample or a user survey, like the 2010-2011 report 8146.0 – Household Use of Information Technology, Australia, 2010-11

          • Alex (NBN)
            Posted 03/12/2013 at 4:41 pm | Permalink |

            All lovely steve…

            But completely off topic and ignoring the basics of congestion resulting in wireless not being able to do the hard slog or dare I say even fulfil the basics…

            Yes they promise it will change as they have done for the last 10-15 years, but the physics is hard to beat.

            So your point in relation to this topic is?

            • steve
              Posted 03/12/2013 at 4:57 pm | Permalink |

              Alex (NBN), the point is that if key assumptions in the NBN plan are found to be incorrect, per standard business practice, the business case and revenue forecasts may need to be reviewed. The ABS data indicates a shift in the assumptions, leaving the leakage assumed in the NBN plan uncertain.

              • Alex (NBN)
                Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:01 pm | Permalink |

                And in relation to the topic we are discussing..???

                Seriously steve with all due respect, we know the corp plan for the real NBN had incorrect estimations, because they missed their targets… just as the new government are already missing theirs…

                You are dwelling on the past for no apparent reason and are off topic for no reason, IMO…

                • steve
                  Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:24 pm | Permalink |

                  Isn’t the topic we are discussing the NBN and the review that is currently in progress? How is discussing a review of leakage assumptions based on the latest available data off-topic? To ensure previous incorrect estimations are not repeated in the new plan. Doesn’t the article above refer to nonsensical assumptions?

                  • Alex (NBN)
                    Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:32 pm | Permalink |

                    steve please… we are discussing Quigley suggesting getting on with rolling out FttN (agree… or like me disagree) not wireless stats…

                    Your estimations are no better or worse than the experts…

                    However, you are starting to remind me of our friend Mathew, who at every topic and every thread for two years, threw in the old 50%/12Mbps corp plan estimation…and swore it was on topic…

                    But then he had a reason for doing so… :/

                    • steve
                      Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:38 pm | Permalink |

                      Quigley also suggested not “using nonsensical assumptions aimed to prove a pre-determined outcome.” Anyway these are not my estimations, they are hard data from the ABS and the NBN would do well to take new data into account, whether you like it or not.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:44 pm | Permalink |

                        Hard data… seems others would suggest this is your interpretation of the data… I haven’t even bothered getting bogged down on the semantics…

                        So to the topic, which is your preference steve, FttP or FttN?

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:30 pm | Permalink |

                        @Alex

                        That’s not the topic, this is the topic.

                        “Get on with FTTN job, Quigley tells NBN Co”

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:42 pm | Permalink |

                        Yes it is good boy…

                        Glad you have awoken (like you did when you mentioned nothing changed with the new government) and are no longer childishly arguing…

                        Now tell your mate…

                • Fibroid
                  Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:26 pm | Permalink |

                  @Alex

                  You don’t get to decide what is off topic and what is not, Steve has made some valid points, you don’t like them but that doesn’t therefore mean they are off topic.

                  BTW your push to try and make any discussion that is anti-Labor FTTP NBN off topic because they are out of Government and the NBN policy is redundant is one thing, but you are extremely selective in how you apply the off topic rule, any pro Labor FTTP comment and the constant push that it was the ‘best policy’ is never off topic.

                  • Alex (NBN)
                    Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:38 pm | Permalink |

                    Welcome back…

                    Been hiding with all the facts showing FttN to already be the clusterfuck we all said… and since you admitted no matter who is in power nothing much changes after all… Whoops eh…!

                    And after all this time and me asking simply, for across the board fairness and you electioneering with one eyed gusto for the Coalition 24/7, you have the audacity to suggest I’m the one with political bias, really *rolls eyes*

                    Well something changes, at least FttP got well and truly underway and simply didn’t meet a few target, hows FttN going – can’t even get a simple review done ontime and the Telstra lackeys are already preparing us for your precious, much lauded and repeated 2016 target, to be missed…?

                    No I don’t decide, but no matter how hard you try to hide the clusterfuck that is FttN, wireless is off topic ATM… but keep trying…

                    • steve
                      Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:13 pm | Permalink |

                      Alex, BT began its FttN commercial roll-out in 2010 and had passed 10 million homes in May 2012, 16 million homes in July 2013.

                      NBN began its commercial FttProll-out in 2011 and has passed 320,000 homes to Nov 2013 vs a scheduled 1.2 million. Yes, well and truly underway, simply didn’t meet a few targets.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:22 pm | Permalink |

                        You didn’t answer my question above steve?

                        But seeing this typical but, but, but BT did FttN… there’s no need…we can see which side your bread is buttered too

                        Funny as soon as I saw you wireless spiel it reminded me of alain’s (Fibroid) old spiel and voila Fibroid reappears… coincidence perhaps and yes off topic, my apology.

                        Well of course BT did… “remember FttN comes cheaper and sooner”… well it does in the UK. it’s so far, not the case here, nor in the foreseeable future, even according to the hand picked Telstra lackeys… it’s all a bit too hard for the latest bunch?

                        But I won’t pre-emp and spread FUD as the others did with FttP… only time will tell.

                        So Mr stats and how does BT count those numbers?

                      • Ray Herring
                        Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:26 pm | Permalink |

                        Can’t really use that as an example. BT is the incumbent Telco, they are rolling FTTN out onto their own network, where they already own all the infrastructure.

                        NBNCo however will eventually roll out an FTTx network of some kind, if it is FTTN, then they need Telstra to come to the party, if Telstra charges through the roof for access to the copper itself then that’s something else NBNCo and the government will have to deal with.

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:27 pm | Permalink |

                        @Alex

                        ‘it’s so far. not the case here… ‘

                        What case?

                        it’s a bit too hard for the latest bunch?

                        It is?

                        ‘But I won’t pre-emp and spread FUD’

                        You just did.

                      • Observer
                        Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:34 pm | Permalink |

                        I don’t recall BT having to negotiate with anyone to use their pits. I don’t recall BT having to wait for someone to clean asbestos in their pits.

                        Anyway, forget BT. Let see how well your mob (it is your mob, isn’t it?) does in the next few years.

                        No more talking. Time for action. No need to bag the previous mob, your mob has the coveted prize now. Time to show, they know what to do. Can’t really say, they’re off to a great start. You know, the promises people thought they heard, not the promises blah, blah, blah…

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:38 pm | Permalink |

                        “What case?”
                        http://www.zdnet.com/nbn-deadlines-missed-can-turnbull-make-the-industry-play-nice-7000023284/

                        It is?
                        Yes…
                        http://www.zdnet.com/au/govt-unlikely-to-hit-nbn-deadline-report-7000023741/

                        You just did.
                        Facts are facts, sorry…

                      • Ben
                        Posted 03/12/2013 at 8:52 pm | Permalink |

                        Steve,

                        In what way is BT’s rollout similar to a potential Australian FTTN rollout? I think you will find there are more differences than similarities. Explain how we won’t run into the same issues as New Zealand.

                        To put it simply, our country is a closer fit to NZ than it is to the UK.

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:42 am | Permalink |

                        @Ben

                        Yes it’s interesting that a successful rollout of FTTN as in BT UK is different to any intended FTTN rollout here, because umm err it just is, and on the subject of Chorus NZ FTTN perhaps you could explain why it is more similar to any intended rollout here and how did it fail, and how can that perceived NZ failure can be directly input to what will happen here?

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 12:15 pm | Permalink |

                        This successful FttN roll out you mean…?

                        http://delimiter.com.au/2012/04/30/fttn-a-huge-mistake-says-ex-bt-cto/

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:59 pm | Permalink |

                        @Alex

                        That’s probably why BT stopped their FTTN rollout in 2012, oh hang on a sec no they didn’t they are still rolling it out in 2013 and have plans to do so well into 2015, not only that they have prioritised FTTN over FTTP and are also actively field testing higher speeds on FTTN.

                        Doesn’t look like FTTN is anywhere near to being on the way out.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 6:58 pm | Permalink |

                        Curiously, ex BT CTO Peter Cochrane, doesn’t agree with you at all Fibroid…

                        But what would he know eh?

                        After all he isn’t told what to say and how to think by the bloke who virtually invented the internet, like “some” ;)

    9. Grant
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 1:10 pm | Permalink |

      50Mbps by 2019 is a joke. 50Mbps should be a minimum requirement for digital households *today*.

      Personally, I’m not interested in anything less than 100Mbps, and I have in the past moved house in order to get it (and now would never go back to less.)

    10. steve
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 1:16 pm | Permalink |

      Martin Eddy, yes, people have taken up a fixed wireless connection because they have no choice due to fixed service quality/availability.

      However, note that fixed-wireless and satellite account for only 142,000 subscriptions, the remaining 6.2 million (98%) wireless subscriptions are for mobile broadband, which has less coverage than DSL.

      While quality/availability of fixed service definitely accounts for a percentage, the difference between households and fixed-service household subscribers is >5 million (>55%) households, not a small percentage.

    11. waterytowers
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 2:18 pm | Permalink |

      Why not give people the option when they rollout to an area? Send out a letter to everyone in the area to put forward a preference of FTTN or FTTH, with an additional cost to the houshold for opting for the more expensive to deploy option. At least then each houshold can benefit from the economies of scale the government is providing as part of the rollout. It may end up that an entire suburb will be deployed FTTH due to 80-90% wanting to pay??

      I would be ok with paying a reasonable amount to automatically upgrade to FTTH…

      • GongGav
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 3:14 pm | Permalink |

        Define “reasonable amount” – part of the conversation is around exactly what that upgrade cost is expected to be. Is $1000 reasonable? How about $5000?

        What you propose is a nice idealogy, but it helps nobody. In short, because it messes with the economies of scale, both rollouts ultimately become more expensive. It needs to be one or the other for the initial rollout, a mix simply cant work easily.

        They roll out one cable to service 1000 premises, the labor costs (the most expensive part) are spread evenly across those 1000 premises. If they have to do it twice, the costs effectively double (because the slow part of rolling the cable out has to be done twice), meaning the cost per property doubles as well. What you gain in some areas you would lose in others, so there arent really any savings by leveraging one rollout off the other.

        Then there are added complications of knowing which property asked for which service, providing the switch over technology to the right property, and so forth. Would be a logistical nightmare.

        • Abel Adamski
          Posted 05/12/2013 at 9:38 am | Permalink |

          NBNCo/GIMPCo has stated it will not be an option for the foreseeable future, besides unless they add GPON nodes into the cabinets it will just be an improved FTTN Service off the same active card/backplane – an issue with vectoring

          • steve
            Posted 06/12/2013 at 2:24 am | Permalink |

            Abel: “NBNCo/GIMPCo has stated it will not be an option for the foreseeable future, besides unless they add GPON nodes into the cabinets it will just be an improved FTTN Service off the same active card/backplane – ”
            FUD. Multi-service access nodes offer both VDSL and GPON services from a single node and can upgrade on a demand basis. BT and DK have been doing this routinely. The fibre from the exchange to the node is the same for FTTN or FTTP.

            Abel: “an issue with vectoring”
            Vectoring is related to the cancellation of cross-talk between copper pairs. The electrical signals in copper cross-talking with the light signals in fibre? Now that’s revolutionary.

            • Abel Adamski
              Posted 06/12/2013 at 6:46 pm | Permalink |

              Steve
              “FUD. Multi-service access nodes offer both VDSL and GPON services from a single node and can upgrade on a demand basis. BT and DK have been doing this routinely.”

              Would you care to elucidate and clarify.
              B.T etc do offer FTTP from the cabinet, however the best they can offer is 384Mb/Sec as it is provided from the active card. So how can it be true GPON FTTP

              • steve
                Posted 08/12/2013 at 10:32 am | Permalink |

                “B.T etc do offer FTTP from the cabinet, however the best they can offer is 384Mb/Sec as it is provided from the active card. So how can it be true GPON FTTP”

                Your argument is like: NBN offer FTTP to the home, however the best they can offer residential customers is 100Mbps. So how can it be true GPON FTTP.

            • Abel Adamski
              Posted 08/12/2013 at 5:17 pm | Permalink |

              Ahh Steve
              ” FUD. Multi-service access nodes offer both VDSL and GPON services from a single node and can upgrade on a demand basis”
              That node of course being an active FTTN node with the vectoring/noise cancellation happening across the very active backplane. The fibre extension is a port off that active node card.
              GPON is of course XG PASSIVE OPTICAL NETWORK with NO active circuitry in the node.
              Sure fibres back to the fan are the same, but the architecture of the active equipment including the FAN is different, the fault location and operational facilities and connections from end to end are different etc etc.

              Note NBN will start offering 1Gb December, maybe limited demand at this time, but GIMPCo’s FTTN regression will never be able to offer that even if the world standard becomes 1Gb

              :”Your argument is like: NBN offer FTTP to the home, however the best they can offer residential customers is 100Mbps. So how can it be true GPON FTTP”

              Sorry Steve, your two responses demonstrate conclusively you have no idea what you are arguing over, as such your arguments are entirely invalid in relation the the NBN or GIMPCo

      • steve
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 3:58 pm | Permalink |

        waterytowers, this is similar to the approach used in Netherlands by Reggefiber. To quote “”In the Netherlands we work on the basis of demand aggregation. This means that we first start a marketing and sales campaign in towns and cities in which we ask residents to sign themselves up for fiber. If more than 30% says yes to fiberglass, we start with the construction of the network. This method resulted in 2008 already in more than 150,000 connections.”

        BT in the UK and Deutsche Telekom in Germany also offer a fibre-on-demand service.

    12. Observer
      Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:34 pm | Permalink |

      I think most would agree that the government should get on with it. What is beginning to emerge, however, is that this is a government which spent most of its time in opposition bagging Labor, rather than developing fully fledged policies. This is all they needed to do to win the next election but now that they have, they actually have to govern.

      This is why they’re developing policies on the run. It is really difficult to understand how they can put most of their eggs in the FTTN basket before they have an agreement with Telstra on the copper network and before having done a proper audit on the condition of the copper. For surely, these are vital issues which underpin the viability and economy of FTTN.

      • Fibroid
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 5:52 pm | Permalink |

        The ex CEO of the Labor FTTP NBN Co doesn’t agree with you.

        “Even though I live in the middle of Sydney, my current peak speed on my ADSL2+ service is about 8Mbps. An increase to 25Mbps by 2016 and to 50 Mbps by 2019 would be an improvement. So, like many other Australians, I do hope that NBN Co, under its new management, can make that happen for me.”

        • Alex (NBN)
          Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:01 pm | Permalink |

          Perhaps you missed what else the ex-CEO said…

          “Do I personally think that an FTTP network is a better technical and economic option and a better investment for our country? Well of course I do.”

          I agree with him on both counts, FttN would be an improvement, but FttP is obviously (to everyone but mindless political yes men, IMO) a much better proposition…

          So do you also agree with Quigley on both counts too?

          Or do you just agree with when it suits and you pick and choose…

          • Fibroid
            Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:24 pm | Permalink |

            Well you should be happy with the Coalition policy it is a mixed infrastructure rollout, you get the best of both worlds.

            • Ray Herring
              Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:30 pm | Permalink |

              Assuming of course it ever gets off the ground. They still need to negotiate with Telstra for access to the copper, which Telstra has to put forth to the shareholders at a shareholder meeting, etc…

              Not to mention the re-training of contractors/sub-contractors for copper installations.

            • Alex (NBN)
              Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:33 pm | Permalink |

              Not able to answer my simple question…

              Thought not :/

            • steve
              Posted 03/12/2013 at 6:43 pm | Permalink |

              Alex, what’s my preference? A roll-out that improves on a plan to pass 1.2 million homes in 3 years for $8.7m in funding, only to deliver 0.3 million for $7.5m in funding.

              Or in your words, anything that improves on “well and truly underway and simply didn’t meet a few targets,” NBN Co. has set the bar very low, anything would be an improvement.

          • steve
            Posted 03/12/2013 at 7:22 pm | Permalink |

            Yes, anything improves on “well and truly underway and simply didn’t meet a few targets,” is good.

            I don’t see any roll-out schedules missed by 1 million homes or budgets overspent by a few billion $ in the articles cited. All we have is “can”, unlikely”, “might”

            With “well and truly underway and simply didn’t meet a few targets” we see a plan to pass 1.2 million homes in 3 years for $8.7m in funding that delivered 0.3 million for $7.5m in funding.

            See the difference? Only one of these is fact.

            • Alex (NBN)
              Posted 03/12/2013 at 8:11 pm | Permalink |

              I don’t even see a roll out … and the hand picked experts can’t either…

              See the difference?

              One is actual although not perfect and one is maybe and certainly will never be perfect (vastly inferior). Keep dreaming and hiding behind a few handpicked figures steveroid.

              ooh and in case you missed them first time…

              http://www.zdnet.com/nbn-deadlines-missed-can-turnbull-make-the-industry-play-nice-7000023284/

              http://www.zdnet.com/au/govt-unlikely-to-hit-nbn-deadline-report-7000023741/

              • steve
                Posted 03/12/2013 at 8:46 pm | Permalink |

                In case you missed them the first time ….
                NBN FttP: 3 years, 0.3m homes, $7.5bn. “not perfect…. simply didn’t meet a few targets”

                BT FttN: 2.5 years, 10m homes “maybe, vastly inferior”

                • Alex (NBN)
                  Posted 03/12/2013 at 9:04 pm | Permalink |

                  So steve says… MT won’t have any problems passing 10 million homes by the end or even mid 2016…

                  Yes or no steve?

                  • steve
                    Posted 03/12/2013 at 9:25 pm | Permalink |

                    MT won’t have any problems passing the benchmark set by the NBN (0.3m homes passed in 3 years)

                    MT only needs to pass 0.4 million homes by the end of 2016 to improve 33% on the NBN’s benchmark

                    MT passing 10 million homes by end 2016 will be a 3200% improvement on the NBN’s benchmark

                    MT passing 9 million homes by end 2016 will be a 2900% improvement on the NBN’s benchmark

                    MT passing 5 million homes by end 2016 will be a 1600% improvement on the NBN’s benchmark

                    • Alex (NBN)
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 6:36 am | Permalink |

                      No, no, no…blah, blah, blah

                      The bench mark you are using is BT – 10 million homes in 2.5 years.

                      Will MT be able to live up to your claim… yes or no?

                    • Alex (NBN)
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:16 am | Permalink |

                      Although IMO, FttN is ultimately extremely stupid and a retrograde step (speaking of your favoured OS comparisons, where else has any country started FttP and reversed to FttN, steve?)…

                      I actually agree with you, TA/MT & Co should easily make their roll out targets. If they don’t it will be complete mismanagement…

                      Why complete mismanagement if they don’t and how will they meet targets?

                      As our illustrious PM has already used elsewhere, by “doing as they said they’d do, not what everyone thought they said they’d do…” in other words, by using sleight of hand and hiding behind political weasel words.

                      They said a “minimum of 25Mbps would be available to all Aussies by 2016 (iirc)…and, of course people assumed by that, that they meant they’d actually make improvements for all Aussies by 2016, but…

                      People in most greenfields, 4G areas, HFC areas, existing NBN areas etc, already have 25Mbps available… so slaps on the back for the gov. having done SFA (not even having succeeded in completing a simple review on time) so far fulfilling “what they said they’d do” to maybe half the population or more?

                      Job half (or more – guessing) done… so if they can’t manage the other/their half, as I said, it will be complete mismanagement.

                      They also said they’d supply it cheaper and sooner.

                      Of course when people complain that they haven’t received the upgrades they were individually going to receive under the previous plan (including delays) the weasel words will be … our promise was of course to all Aussies as a whole, we obviously can’t make individual promises and we again reaffirm that our plan will be completed and available to all Aussies ‘sooner than the previous plans estimations’ and it ‘will cost less than the previous plans estimations’ (well of course vastly inferior, obsolete, copper based technology, only to the node should be sooner and cheaper)… if the vastly inferior topology, only half of the job required, isn’t sooner and cheaper, as I said, it will be complete mismanagement.

                      Sad part, the political Cyclops’s here, won’t care that not much has changed, our comms hasn’t really greatly improved or such plans may not be affordable to the consumer, especially after them telling us “10 million homes can be passed in 2.5 years using FttN” and their heroes have completed nothing of the sort… instead of the complaints and angst they held in relation to the previous NBN…

                      … they’ll be so proud and smug that we have all been duped by their heroes sleight of hand and political weasel words.

                      • steve
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 9:25 am | Permalink |

                        “speaking of your favoured OS comparisons, where else has any country started FttP and reversed to FttN, steve?)…”
                        Funnily enough, one of the countries that started FttP and reversed to FttN was BT in the UK.
                        http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2013/04/bt-abandons-native-uk-fttp-broadband-rollout-for-fttpod-and-fttc.html
                        Ditto DK in Germany: “Deutsche Telekom which has stated it would invest EUR 6 billion for broadband roll-out in Germany using FTTC + VDSL2 vectoring has in fact slowed its deployment of FTTH, stating that will only deploy in markets where it is profitable. ”

                        If they deliver 25Mbps in around 3 years and 50Mbps in around 6 years to most, it’ll be a job well-done, after having supported Rudd in 2007 and waited 6 years for SFA. 25Mbps is 25Mbps, whether delivered over copper, fibre, HFC, wireless, smoke signals or whatever makes sense. Reusing existing infrastructure where it is suitable makes more sense than ripping it out. In any case, greenfields will get FTTH, apartment blocks will get FTTB and anybody who wants it will get FTTH as fibre-on-demand, just like the UK and Germany.

                        Point is we gave the other mob their chance and they stuffed it up every which way for 6 years, so let’s give this mob the same breathing space and opportunity to either perform or stuff up, without nipping at their heels and white-anting day after day after day.

                        Your characterisation of vastly inferior, obsolete, etc. is plainly hyperbole. The fact is that the total FTTH worldwide is ~2.5% and OECD telcos are deploying targeted FTTx in conjunction with LTE, . Even the broadband leaders South Korea and Japan have only deployed 17% and 26% FTTH. So if FTTx is vastly inferior and obsolete, we’re in good company. So let’s wait 3 years before we start damning.

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 9:37 am | Permalink |

                        @Alex

                        ‘Although IMO, FttN is ultimately extremely stupid and a retrograde step’

                        Just putting stupid and retrograde in front of FTTN is no substitute for rational well thought out argument.

                        ‘ (speaking of your favoured OS comparisons, where else has any country started FttP and reversed to FttN,’

                        No country has a 100% Government owned communications company that had as a goal rolling out FTTP to 93% of residents at a total funding cost of $45.6b, so it’s impossible to draw any comparison.

                        ‘I actually agree with you, TA/MT & Co should easily make their roll out targets. If they don’t it will be complete mismanagement…’

                        I am sure they will in time, but let’s hope that ‘in time’ is not repeated as per the Labor rollout targets, they won Government in 2007, their NBN rollout targets were announced December 2010.

                        ‘They said a “minimum of 25Mbps would be available to all Aussies by 2016 (iirc)…and, of course people assumed by that, that they meant they’d actually make improvements for all Aussies by 2016, but…’

                        ‘but… ‘ it’s not 2016 yet.

                        ‘They also said they’d supply it cheaper and sooner.’

                        It’s still not 2016 yet, also it’s not 2019 either.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:24 am | Permalink |

                        Wow I’m being tagged teamed, with meh by twins…LOL…

                        Just when we thought the FUD might end, it actually increases :/

                        …and fancy incumbents who own copper wanting to wring every cent, eh..

                        So in other words no country has started to roll out complete FttP and decided, no we’ll completely change our entire plan and complete topology, I thought not… thank you.

                        Yes yes, greenfields… no one, even MT, is silly enough to roll out new copper are they?

                        No it’s not 2016 yet, going by the comms preferences you two display… it must still be 2005/Sol nirvana in your eyes and about 1957 in the eyes of your hero…

                        *sigh*

                  • Alex (NBN)
                    Posted 03/12/2013 at 9:50 pm | Permalink |

                    I would have thought the new man with all the answers to the questions unasked here today, could, err, answer one simple question for me…

                    Would please help?

                    But alas like his colleagues he instead disappears…

                    Whatever dude :/

        • Observer
          Posted 03/12/2013 at 9:19 pm | Permalink |

          How does this, in any way, has anything to do with what I said? The fact that the ex-CEO says he “hopes” does respond to what I said. Please send me the link where he says that anything about the cost and state of the network. Or are you indulging in conjecture? Surely not. Not you the conjecture hater.

          I like it when you quote Quigley. You are a born again Quigley fan. Nice to see. What else do you have in store for us. I suppose you have to wait for the next double backflip to work out what you should believe and support.

        • Harimau
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 1:08 am | Permalink |

          Quigley suggests that 8Mbps in 2013 is inadequate.
          (What is adequate is likely higher, say, 12.5Mbps)

          Quigley suggests that 25Mbps in 2016 is adequate.
          Quigley suggests that 50Mbps in 2019 is adequate.

          Using those numbers, then based on exponential growth, in order to continue to provide an adequate service, we would thus need:
          100Mbps in 2022
          200Mbps in 2025
          and so on.

          Will FTTN be able to provide an adequate service for most Australians in 2022? No.

          That means we would need to invest in FTTP and have it ready by 2022.

          This raises two questions:
          1) Can we replace all connections from FTTN to FTTP between 2019 to 2022?
          2) How do we repay the initial investment in FTTN if we must make a new investment in FTTP?

          • Fibroid
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:43 pm | Permalink |

            What happens to Australia in 2022 if we don’t all have FTTP by then, and is this unique to us or will it happen to all non FTTP areas in the world if they don’t upgrade to FTTP by 2022?

            Why do assume FTTN has reached it’s speed limits and there will be no advancements beyond what we have now and what is being trialled in 2013/2014?

            • Harimau
              Posted 05/12/2013 at 3:33 am | Permalink |

              “What happens to Australia in 2022 if we don’t all have FTTP by then?”
              We fall behind once again. We end up last once again. We get stuck with inadequate services once again.

              “Is this unique to us or will it happen to all non FTTP areas in the world if they don’t upgrade to FTTP by 2022?”
              It will happen to most non-FTTP areas in the world that do not upgrade to FTTP by 2022. Some non-FTTP areas will continue to be able to sweat the existing copper, as it will be technically-possible and cost-effective for them to do so. It will be particularly harsh in Australia, as the cost-effectiveness of improving FTTN-based networks is greatly reduced due to the relative sparseness of our premises (each node servicing far fewer premises, especially at the short distances required for these FTTN-based network improvements) compared to other places.

              “Why do you assume FTTN has reached it’s speed limits and there will be no advancements beyond what we have now and what is being trialled in 2013/2014?”
              1) Diminishing returns make sustained investment unlikely. Eventually the copper incumbents directly or indirectly funding those advancements will make the switch to fibre (it’s inevitable).
              2) The copper in Australia will be unable to support those advancements anyway, as much of it is of inferior quality, and also because of its state of repair such that it has been described as “five minutes to midnight”.
              3) Most of the advancements in copper network data throughput are coupled with bringing the fibre closer to the end-user (ADSL2+ at several km, FTTN at distances less than 1000m or 500m, and G.Fast is said to be effective at distances less than 200m). Unless we plan for that and build nodes 200-400m apart from one another, gaining those benefits for any significant proportion of the population is simply unlikely. Doing so would drastically increase the number of nodes required to service FTTN heavily increasing the initial cost, while also driving up the average per-household cost of improving the FTTN service in the future (because each node supports less households).

          • Fibroid
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 5:22 pm | Permalink |

            Just to add G.fast is well into the process of being approved by the ITU.

            http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2013/30.aspx

            • Alex (NBN)
              Posted 04/12/2013 at 5:29 pm | Permalink |

              Oh, so we do need such speeds, like the ones you’ve continually told us we don’t need, now … ROFL

              It just gets better with each contradictory double twist with somersault and half pike that you guys inevitably perform… and you even say the complete opposite you did not so long ago and expect to be taken seriously?

              Keep up the great work, because like the FttN fraudband you opposed in 2007, which you now support (yes, yes, in amongst all the rest of the mish-mash too, we know, like the HFC you told us failed but now laud…another nice one) you’ll eventually see that FttP is best too…

              Step by step though…

      • steve
        Posted 03/12/2013 at 10:00 pm | Permalink |

        Observer, I agree, the government should get on with it.

        However, Labor took a fully fledged FTTN policy to the 2007 election, announced a switch to FTTP in 2009, NBN Co. was formed in 2010 and we have 0.3m homes passed at end- 2013.

        “It is really difficult to understand how they can put most of their eggs in the FTTN basket before they have an agreement with Telstra on the copper network and before having done a proper audit on the condition of the copper. For surely, these are vital issues which underpin the viability and economy of FTTN.”

        Kevin Rudd put his eggs in the FTTP basket in 2009 well before the 2011 agreement with Telstra and never did any audit on the condition of the Telstra pits, both of which underpinned the viability and economy of the NBN.

        Compared to the 6 years it took to get from 2007 election to 0.3m homes passed in 2013, just 3 months has passed since the last election.

        • Alex (NBN)
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 6:42 am | Permalink |

          My goodness your argument and Fibroids are almost identical…Right down to the silly, 2007 election, change to FttP…

          Big difference with the agreement between Telstra and the previous government and Telstra and the current government is of course… FttP could have proceeded with or without deal, it was just prudent to deal.

          WIthout copper there isn’t FttN…dead, cremated, so to speak…

          But of course such rationale and logic comes a distant second to one’s much more important, politics eh?

          • steve
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 7:49 am | Permalink |

            “…it was just prudent to deal” i.e. it underpinned the viability, revenue and business case of the NBN. Which is why it was the first critical milestone in the plan and why the volume rollout was delayed until the commencement date of the agreement.

            “FttP could have proceeded with or without deal,,,,” i.e. with or without economic viability, revenue streams, Telstra’s customer base and access to the Telstra pits? Evidently the NBN executives did not think so.

            The fact is that six years after Labor took its national broadband policy to the 2007 election we have 0.3m homes passed. That is Labor’s benchmark.

          • Fibroid
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 9:11 am | Permalink |

            ‘FttP could have proceeded with or without deal, it was just prudent to deal.’

            $11b to Telstra is quite a prudent deal, in fact Telstra cannot believe their prudent luck, all that money to pump into wireless.

            Very interesting that you think the FTTP NBN could have proceeded without the use of Telstra ducting, the existing Telstra exchange buildings for the NBN FAN’s , and the little matter of over 50% of the BB retail and wholesale customer base.

            • Alex (NBN)
              Posted 04/12/2013 at 9:22 am | Permalink |

              It’s not just ineteresting, it’s fact…

              Yes that word which forever proves your crusade the farce it is…fact…

              The NBN (the real one, not the clusterfuck which a promised simple review can’t even eventuate on time…LOL – doesn’t that make MT a liar) had a Telstra and sans Telstra plan, which you know, but it’s prudent to ignore, like well, all of the other facts…

              • Fibroid
                Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:18 am | Permalink |

                @Alex

                ‘It’s not just ineteresting, it’s fact…’

                No it’s not a fact, the fact would be proven if the Labor FTTP was rolled out without Telstra, Conroy knew that was mission impossible otherwise he would have done it and not reached an agreement to pay them $11b for the use of their ducts, exchanges, shutdown HFC for BB and retail and wholesale client base etc.

                Conroy also got the big stick out and said he would structurally separate Telstra, some stick, more like a wet paper bag, but hey he’s in his element now on the Senate NBN commitee telling the Coalition how it should be done, the delicious irony in his role there is supreme.

                • Alex (NBN)
                  Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:26 am | Permalink |

                  No it was in the corp plan… i.e. Quigley (the guy you quote from said)…so !

                  • Fibroid
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 5:24 pm | Permalink |

                    umm what? I have no idea what ‘corp plan’ you are referring to.

                    • Alex (NBN)
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 5:48 pm | Permalink |

                      Indeed we agree – you have no idea…!

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:10 pm | Permalink |

                        So you just made it up because you had no factual answer.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:19 pm | Permalink |

                        Fire up all those screens and read what NBNCo said. Read each and every word and then return more educated and ready for further instruction…

                        Go…

            • Observer
              Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:01 am | Permalink |

              “in fact Telstra cannot believe their prudent luck”

              Not as much as they did when they heard Turnbull say he wanted to buy and use their dilapidated network. That reached a climax when they realised that he was actually talking up its condition.

              Now, that is a first. Never in the history of commercial negotiation, has a buyer talked up the value of what he is trying to buy.

              Still can’t wait to see how it unfolds.

              • Fibroid
                Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:03 pm | Permalink |

                MT has not said he will buy the Telstra copper network.

                • Observer
                  Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:10 pm | Permalink |

                  Correct. He has said he would like to.

                  In your eagerness to defend everything Coalition, you have once again come up with a nitpicking answer. Keep up the good (but useless) work.

                  • Fibroid
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:26 pm | Permalink |

                    Where did MT say he would like to buy the Telstra copper network?

                    • Observer
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 6:28 pm | Permalink |

                      Just look it up. It has been widely reported. I don’t care to play your silly little games.

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:11 pm | Permalink |

                        lol oh I see, just say you made it up.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:24 pm | Permalink |

                        Oh so the network will be completely free will it?

                        Telstra don’t want the $11B after all?

                      • Posted 05/12/2013 at 11:06 am | Permalink |

                        hi Fibroid,

                        FYI you have been banned from Delimiter for a month. Going back through your posts over the past several weeks, they display the following problems:

                        1. They are often rude to other commenters
                        2. They are often extremely short and do not inject useful information into the discussion. Instead, they just incite anger on the part of other commenters because they do not appear to add to the debate
                        3. They are universally slanted towards one side of the debate. We don’t like this on Delimiter — Delimiter is a site for open-minded debate. I have come to believe you have a fixed point of view, which is not welcome here when you post as often as you do

                        Mate, we’ve been down this path before … I am starting to believe you are not capable of change.

                        Cheers,

                        Renai

          • steve
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 9:55 am | Permalink |

            “…it was just prudent to deal”
            i.e. it underpinned the viability, revenue and business case of the NBN. Which is why it was the first critical milestone in the plan and why the volume rollout was delayed until the commencement date of the agreement.

            “FttP could have proceeded with or without deal,,,,”
            i.e. with or without economic viability, revenue streams, Telstra’s customer base and access to the Telstra pits? Evidently the NBN executives did not think so.

            The fact is that six years after Labor took its national broadband policy to the 2007 election we have 0.3m homes passed. That is Labor’s benchmark.

            • Alex (NBN)
              Posted 04/12/2013 at 12:10 pm | Permalink |

              Do you actually have anything of substance to add steve? Like we can see you are trying hard, sitting up all night, up early to continue the crusade, but…

              You told us above that FttP is dead, didn’t you? Well I could be pedantic as you were to me and ask about greenfields, Fttx variants etc, but won’t stoop to such a childish level…

              But interesting that you say it’s dead when the current “overdue review” is meant to help ascertain whether FttP is actually dead and isn’t the promised CBA also supposed to ascertain this too… yet you, obviously someomne with close Coalition ties, says its dead, hmm…

              You’ve made multiple comments and basically said the same 3 things UK, FttN good, FttP missed targets bad/dead and when quizzed about your 10 m houses passed UK compariosn, refused to answer whether MT can emulate this…?

            • Brendan
              Posted 04/12/2013 at 12:21 pm | Permalink |

              Ignoring the time it took to tender out, the ~2 years it took to negotiate with Telstra. And get legislation passed. And have ACCC sign off.

              You are acting like the Government could simply click it’s fingers, and job done. Any project will take time to ramp up.

              Turnbull’s chosen path will be no different and it, too, would almost certainly take years to pick up speed. Deployments of this type do not have a linear scale, nor do they happen instantly.

              And this is exactly why Quigley is saying “hurry up”. Extended delays will set back any construction cycle immensely.

              • Alex (NBN)
                Posted 04/12/2013 at 1:58 pm | Permalink |

                Indeed,

                However MT has the distinct advantage of NBNCo already being established… all he’s had to do is bring in a few Telstra lackey/yes men, tweak a bit and simply continue… not start from scratch!

                Yet a simple 60 day report takes 80-90 days?

              • Fibroid
                Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:19 pm | Permalink |

                @Brendan

                ‘And this is exactly why Quigley is saying “hurry up”. Extended delays will set back any construction cycle immensely.’

                The hangover contractual obligations NBN FTTP construction cycle continues on though, I don’t know when you expected the FTTN construction cycle to start, but it certainly was never going to be in 2013.

                The 25 Mbps and 50 Mbps policy targets are not just FTTN rollout targets, it is a mixed infrastructure rollout, a myopic one infrastructure type FTTP rollout to 93% of residences takes longer and is very costly, so there is no way the Labor NBN Co would have promised a min of 25 Mbps for all by 2016.

                • Alex (NBN)
                  Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:26 pm | Permalink |

                  “The 25 Mbps and 50 Mbps policy targets are not just FTTN rollout targets, it is a mixed infrastructure rollout…”

                  Yes the weasel words already, as I alluded to… did I give you a hint did I…?

                  http://delimiter.com.au/2013/12/03/get-fttn-job-quigley-tells-nbn-co/#comment-631268

                  • Fibroid
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:33 pm | Permalink |

                    The Coalition NBN policy has always been a mixed infrastructure rollout, it is in their policy release from April 2013 and the policy has not been amended, nothing to do with ‘weasle words’.

                    • Alex (NBN)
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 5:15 pm | Permalink |

                      Not weasel words, says who, you? lol

    13. Harimau
      Posted 04/12/2013 at 12:22 am | Permalink |

      Mike Quigley says “This risk exists because an FTTN network cannot easily be upgraded to FTTP in an NBN environment.”

      You immediately afterward say “FTTN can ultimately be upgraded to FTTP down the track.”

      They don’t necessarily contradict one another, but there is a significant difference. I just wanted to point that out.

      • Fibroid
        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:17 am | Permalink |

        What is the significant difference?

        • Coaloid
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:05 am | Permalink |

          Quigley is saying it is quite a hard thing to do so you better be sure FTTN is adequate for quite some time.
          What Renai says seems to say it is a quite straight forward process to go from FTTN to FTTH.

        • Harimau
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 10:12 am | Permalink |

          Quigley: “cannot easily be upgraded”
          Renai: “can be upgraded”

        • Non Puto
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 11:06 am | Permalink |

          “What is the significant difference?”

          As always money.

          How much more is it going to cost to upgrade FTTN to FTTP when it no longer meets the populations needs.

          Prior to September 7th 2013 the cost to replace ADSL for those that could get it with FTTP was around $30 billion (Government funding), now its around $29 billion (Government funding) for FTTN to less premises.

          Which ultimately means that we get to waste a fair chunk of that $29 Billion as the FTTN sections need to be redone and that’s where the dollar costs come from.

          Now with the need to get “value’ for the expenditure there will be a desire to keep that investment in FTTN until its repaid the CAPEX, which due to ability for other companies to compete with FTTN (ala TPG FTTB to flats etc) means that those on FTTN will have it longer and there will be less money coming in to pay for that CAPEX.

          • Fibroid
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:38 pm | Permalink |

            ‘for those that could get it with FTTP was around $30 billion (Government funding), now its around $29 billion (Government funding) for FTTN to less premises.’

            That is the incorrect funding comparison, it is $29.5b and $45.6B.

            The higher figure is of course for FTTP because FTTP is more costly to rollout than FTTN, and it is slower to rollout, so your ROI takes longer to achieve and reach break even.

            ‘How much more is it going to cost to upgrade FTTN to FTTP when it no longer meets the populations needs.’

            Well the key to that answer is what year or decade is that, I will use the crystal ball after you.

            • Observer
              Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:02 pm | Permalink |

              ‘How much more is it going to cost to upgrade FTTN to FTTP when it no longer meets the populations needs.’

              “Well the key to that answer is what year or decade is that, I will use the crystal ball after you.”

              Congratulations, Fibroid. You have killed two birds with one stone. You have not only reminded us what a smart arse you are, you have also shown us the shallowness of your think. Well done!

              I guess that when you buy something, you never worry how long it is going to last as long as it is cheap.

              • Fibroid
                Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:10 pm | Permalink |

                So you have no idea when this timeline will be reached either, it would be more straightforward if you just said so.

                • Alex (NBN)
                  Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:16 pm | Permalink |

                  Perhpas it will occur when we finally get a real government in power…

                  Because after all the last mob were crap according to you and nothing has changed with the new government, also according to you, eh?

                • Observer
                  Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:41 pm | Permalink |

                  “So you have no idea when this timeline will be reached either”

                  Another poor attempt at sarcasm but since you ask. It will be soon enough to be taken into account.

                  It is like buying a 20 year old car and saying because you don’t know exactly how long it will last, its age and condition are irrelevant to your purchase. So you spend $29.500 on a 20 year old car when you can buy and better, brand new one for $30.000 (or even $37.000 if you like) because you don’t know how long the old car will suit your needs and your main reason is that you want it quicker.

                  Short term solutions for long term needs always end up being costlier.

                  • Fibroid
                    Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:58 pm | Permalink |

                    Your analogy is flawed , it’s not $29.500 for a 20 year old car, FTTN VDSL2, was ratified by the ITU-T in 2006, G.fast is even more recent and is about two years old, you want to redo that analogy?

                    • Alex (NBN)
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 5:17 pm | Permalink |

                      2006… wow!

                      I reiterate… (refer last paragraph – excl the mandatory sigh at ones continued childishness)

                      http://delimiter.com.au/2013/12/03/get-fttn-job-quigley-tells-nbn-co/#comment-631294

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 5:28 pm | Permalink |

                        That counts as a response that you got the 20 yr old analogy wrong, link to something that has nothing whatever to do with it?

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 5:36 pm | Permalink |

                        Err, no obviously… I was responding to your ridiculous 2006 claim not the 20 year old car analogy and I prophesied your 2005 ish mindset just this morning…(refer to link)

                        How ironically juicy eh? You do indeed still live and breath the Sol era…

                        2006 tech, linked to 19th century copper… oh please, stop…ROFL

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:14 pm | Permalink |

                        The 2006 VDSL2 claim is factual, 2013 minus 2006 is not 20 years, 2013 minus 2012 for G.fast is not 20 years either.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:30 pm | Permalink |

                        :/

                    • Observer
                      Posted 04/12/2013 at 6:32 pm | Permalink |

                      The analogy is not flawed. It does not matter what you spend the money on to improve the old car, it is still fundamentally an old car.

                      I don’t have to redo the analogy simply because you lack the mental agility to understand it.

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 7:47 pm | Permalink |

                        Ever notice that the FttN fans never mention the upkeep of the copper and the reported $1B p.a. that goes along with it Observer…?

                      • Observer
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:10 pm | Permalink |

                        Nor do they mention the cost of copper network and its remediation.

                        To continue the analogy (This might get much too hard for poor Fibroid), it is like saying they will spend $25000 of extra on an old car they do not own yet but hope to get for free, even though they are talking up its condition. Finally, despite their ignorance of its condition, they won’t bother budgeting for possible repairs.

                        And yet, when you ask Fibroid how long they hope it will last, his priceless answer is “I don’t have a crystal ball”. This really shows that, like his political masters, he is a redoubtable, astute buyer

                      • Fibroid
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:16 pm | Permalink |

                        ‘Nor do they mention the cost of copper network and its remediation.’

                        Neither do you Alex, how much is it again, I missed the figure?

                      • Alex (NBN)
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:26 pm | Permalink |

                        Why am I not surmised you missed it…

                        Well after all while permanently residing in 2006, you’ve missed 2007-2013.

                        :)

                      • Observer
                        Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:32 pm | Permalink |

                        Either you are stupid enough to believe that Alex and I are the same person or you just want to play this silly little game. I suggest you grow up and drop it. Focus instead in trying to come up with coherent answers, something you seem to struggle with.

                      • Posted 05/12/2013 at 11:10 am | Permalink |

                        FYI Observer you have been banned from Delimiter for a month for breach of the following Delimiter comments policy item:

                        “Firstly, as before, comments must be more or less ‘polite’, as measured by Australian social standards. This doesn’t mean you need to maintain the sort of conversation level you would use with your mother. It just basically means don’t be rude to other commenters. You may disagree with their opinions, but you should respect their right to hold them. This rule especially applies to the treatment of article authors, who deserve a significant amount of respect for putting their writing into the public domain.”

                        I looked back on your comments over the past few weeks, and there’s a lot of open insults in there. I’m sorry, but we don’t tolerate that on Delimiter.

                        Renai

            • Harimau
              Posted 05/12/2013 at 3:40 am | Permalink |

              Non Puto: “How much more is it going to cost to upgrade FTTN to FTTP when it no longer meets the populations needs.”
              Fibroid: “Well the key to that answer is what year or decade is that, I will use the crystal ball after you.”

              2022 according to your implicit agreement with Mr Quigley’s comments.
              2025 according to Matthew Sorrell (who is more optimistic).

              • steve
                Posted 06/12/2013 at 12:19 am | Permalink |

                Non Puto: “How much more is it going to cost to upgrade FTTN to FTTP when it no longer meets the populations needs.”
                Fibroid: “Well the key to that answer is what year or decade is that, I will use the crystal ball after you.”
                Harimou:”2022 according to your implicit agreement with Mr Quigley’s comments.
                2025 according to Matthew Sorrell (who is more optimistic).”

                Actually, according to the NBN Corporate Plan:
                In FY 2022, 58% of its subscribers would be on plans <=50Mbps
                In FY 2025 52% of its subscribers would be on plans <=50Mbps
                in FY 2028 45% of its subscribers would be on plans <=50Mbps

                Remembering that the NBN plan assumes a 70% subscription rate, according to NBN Co's own forecasts:
                In FY 2022, 50Mbps would meet the needs of 71% of the population
                In FY 2025, 50Mbps would meet the needs of 66% of the population
                In FY 2028 50Mbps would meet the needs of 62% of the population

                VDSL2 with G.Vector takes FTTN speed to over 100Mbps.
                According to the NBN Corporate Plan, In FY2028 58% of its subscribers would be on plans <= 100Mbps
                i.,e. in FY2028, FTTN with G.Vector would meet the needs of 71% of the population

                G.Fast takes FTTN speeds to over 300Mbps.
                According to the NBN Corporate Plan, in FY2028 80% of its subscribers would be on plans <=250Mbps
                i.e. in FY2028 FTTN with G.Fast would meet the needs of 86% of the population.

                Non Puto: "when it no longer meets the populations needs.”
                According to NBN Co.s forecasts, FTTN will meet the needs of 83% of the population to 2028 with currently known technology. When you refer to the population's needs, you were referring to the silent majority, right? Surely you weren't referring to the 14% vocal minority!!

                • Alex (NBN)
                  Posted 06/12/2013 at 6:17 am | Permalink |

                  steve you are starting to sound like Mathew with your continued bombardment of off topic, pointless numbers based on estimations from the previous Corporate Plan.

                  Seriously you can’t keep having it both ways, claim the previous NBN Corporate Plan a complete failure, but continually refer to figures contained within the very same Corporate Plan as your evidence.

                  For goodness sake, instead of hiding behind this lame deflection, please move on and try to convince us (with somethig other than previous estimations, mixed with a few handpicked stats to deride the previous NBN) that the new FttN based plan from the current government has merit…

    14. Tony of Poorakistan
      Posted 04/12/2013 at 8:56 am | Permalink |

      I’d be stoked to receive the promised 25Mbps by late 2016 and, in fact, this was one of the reasons I voted LNP, since I was last in the queue under the ALP scheme meaning I’d be stuck on my 2Mbps ADSL2 until 2020.

      Now, however, it is starting to look like Turnbull lied through his teeth and I will be lucky to get my 25Mbps by 2018. If we are going to wait that long ANYWAY, we should go with FTTP

      • Fibroid
        Posted 04/12/2013 at 9:45 am | Permalink |

        What makes you think the Labor NBN Co would definitely have you activated by 2020?

        • Brendan
          Posted 04/12/2013 at 12:13 pm | Permalink |

          With respect, NBNco were actively deploying; they’re now in a holding pattern unable to accelerate rollout because the Government has decided it needs another review.

          Which we’re still waiting for.

          • Fibroid
            Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:34 pm | Permalink |

            @Brendan

            What also they were actively doing was drastically underestimating roll out targets and re doing the ‘you will get the NBN’ mapping, to say it doesn’t look as if the Coalition will meet their 2016 target when it hasn’t even started (yes I know they should have it finished after all they have been in Government for three months!!), so we might as well roll out FTTP anyway assumes all NBN FTTP targets would have miraculously been met right through to 2021.

            How you accomplish this when in September this year your actual rollout figure is a bit over half of what you said it would be 12 months earlier no one can explain.

          • steve
            Posted 05/12/2013 at 8:22 pm | Permalink |

            “With respect, NBNCo were actively deploying; they’re now in a holding pattern unable to accelerate rollout because the Government has decided it needs another review.”

            I work in IT program management and any program that had slipped its delivery milestones by 77% yet consumed 87% of its planned investment would be reviewed to death before being quietly shelved, its staff redeployed and the executives responsible sacked. Only government has the option of throwing good money after bad.

            • Alex (NBN)
              Posted 05/12/2013 at 11:44 pm | Permalink |

              77% missed?

              87% consumed?

              Link or citation required please…

            • steve
              Posted 06/12/2013 at 1:29 am | Permalink |

              P.S.
              Premises passed FY 2013: 0.3m. Planned: 1.3m. Shortfall:77% FAIL
              Premises Activated FY 2013: 73,000. Planned: 511,000 Shortfall: 86% FAIL

              Investment FY 2013: $7.5bn. Planned: $8.7bn. Difference: 14% FAIL
              Revenue FY 2013: $18m. Planned: $160m. Shortfall: 89% FAIL

              http://management.simplicable.com/management/new/5-definitions-of-project-failure
              “Any project that fails to meet time, budget and quality targets is considered a failure.
              Any project that fails to meet the financial forecasts set out in its business plan is considered a failure.”

              • Alex (NBN)
                Posted 06/12/2013 at 6:07 am | Permalink |

                Planned investment (iirc) $45.6B.

                They did not consume $39.6B.

                Your comment is invalid

    15. Observer
      Posted 04/12/2013 at 3:55 pm | Permalink |

      I was just wondering. What happened to Haha yeah? Is Steve his new name or is Steve his replacement? I find it fascinating that Fibroid/Alain always has a sidekick who eventually disappears or reappears under a new label.

      Problem is the points made are not getting any better. In fact, it is worse. Acting just like their political masters, they haven’t realised they are no longer in opposition. My advice is that if the Coalition policy is so good, let their actions speak for themselves. Who cares what Labor did or didn’t do. It is like an actor replacing an actor who got sacked, spending most of his time telling people how bad his predecessor was rather than showing that he’s good enough for the part.

      • Alex (NBN)
        Posted 04/12/2013 at 4:00 pm | Permalink |

        Perhaps it because they simply “are not good enough for the part”…

        ;)

    16. Abel Adamski
      Posted 05/12/2013 at 9:34 am | Permalink |

      http://www.zdnet.com/in/rural-india-gets-internet-rollout-boost-ahead-of-elections-7000023819/

    17. steve
      Posted 05/12/2013 at 1:25 pm | Permalink |

      Alex: “If fixed is being dragged down by wireless please explain…
      http://delimiter.com.au/2013/12/03/get-fttn-job-quigley-tells-nbn-co/#comment-631400

      Easy. 10% of premises are responsible for 90% of downloads. A single business e.g. Westpac with 27,000 employees and 100s of terabytes of data in the cloud could be responsible for data equivalent to 0.5m average households. There are ~1m businesses.

      So on one side we have a single business responsible for Terabytes of data. On the other side we have 5.3m premises with no fixed-line Internet. What’s that prove?

      • Alex (NBN)
        Posted 05/12/2013 at 2:33 pm | Permalink |

        “Easy. 10% of premises are responsible for 90% of downloads.”

        Link or citation? Or is that an opinon/guess?

        Also you will note in the last quarter measured, fixed downlaods increased by 20% whilst wireless downloads decreased by 3%.

        My point is, regardless of whether the fixed downloads are being performed by 1%, 10% (your guess until citation received) 90% or what ever the percentage, wireless is not going to impact greatly.

        Yes it will impact either FttP or FttN (strangely you guys seem to think because MT didn’t say so in his policy it’s not a risk to FttN just FttP?????)…

        Again as myself and others said yesterday, with 4G in many cases outperforming FttN, IMO wireless is ergo more likely to impact upon FttN than FttP…

        • steve
          Posted 05/12/2013 at 5:38 pm | Permalink |

          Thanks Alex, this is the last time I respond to the strawmen you throw up unbacked by facts and devoid of logic. As you are evidently deficient in critical thought processes and tend to resort instead to juvenile ad hominems and name calling, this is also the last time I read any of your comments.

          “My point is, regardless of whether the fixed downloads are being performed by 1%, 10% (your guess until citation received) 90% or what ever the percentage, wireless is not going to impact greatly.”

          If you read my comments I consistently referred to the impact of wireless on NBN take-up rates, not on downloads. I agree that wireless is not going to impact greatly on downloads.

          “Yes it will impact either FttP or FttN (strangely you guys seem to think because MT didn’t say so in his policy it’s not a risk to FttN just FttP?????)…”

          The impact of wireless leakage will be much larger on a $2,800 capex per premise FTTP than on a $900 capex per premise FTTN, less on FTTB in MDUs and and even less where existing HFC infrastructure is reused.

          The impact will also be larger for the NBN roll-out that had forecast revenue on the basis that wireless-only households will remain below 16.4% for the next 30 years, than for a rollout that correctly plans for wireless-only leakage trends.

          Feel free to continue to engage in juvenile behaviour. Goodbye.

          • Alex (NBN)
            Posted 05/12/2013 at 11:39 pm | Permalink |

            I’m sorry you feel that way steve.

            But rest assured I won’t lower myself to your level now, by questioning your critical thought process skills or lack thereof…

            Suffice to say, being here at an evidence based forum and me simply asking you questions, which you were clearly…unable to answer and me also asking you to simply substantiate your claims (political dogma) with evidence, which again, you were clearly unable to do, it is understandable just why you dearly wish to and must, avoid me in future…

    18. steve
      Posted 05/12/2013 at 2:01 pm | Permalink |

      Harimau: “However, the number of fixed-line connections in Australia continues to grow (ABS 8153.0), which indicates that the threat of large numbers of wireless-only households is either false or overstated.”

      Facts:
      Total fixed-line connections grew from 5.98m to 6.10m between 2010 and 2013 (0.67% per year)
      Total wireless connection grew from 3.58m to 6.30m between 2010 and 2013 (25.33% per year)

      In 2013, there are 5.3m premises with no fixed-line connection.

      Draw your own conclusions.

      • steve
        Posted 05/12/2013 at 5:03 pm | Permalink |

        P.S. Between 2010 and 2013:
        - Australia’s population grew by 961,295 (ABS)
        - total premises (homes + businesses) grew by 531,000 (NBN Corp Plan)
        - Fixed-line connections grew by 120,000 (ABS)
        - Wireless connections grew by 2,720,000 (ABS)

        ABS 8146.0 – Household Use of Information Technology, Australia, 2010-11 has 79% of households with internet connections at home, up from 64% in 2006-2007. At the same growth trend (3.75% per year), in 2013 there would be 90% of households connected i.e. in 2013 there should be 9 million households with internet connections.

        ABS 8129.0 – Business Use of Information Technology, 2011-12 shows 91.9% of businesses with internet access, up from 91.2% in 2010-2011. At the same growth rate (0.7% per year), in 2013 there would be 92.6% of businesses connected i.e. in 2013 there should be 1.3 million business internet connections.

        So household + business internet connections should be ~10.3 million.
        There are 6.1 fixed-line subscriptions, 6.3 million wireless/mobile wireless subscriptions and 19.6 million mobile phone internet subscriptions.

        Draw your own conclusions as to how the 4.2 million internet-connected premises with no fixed-line subscriptions are accessing the internet.

        • steve
          Posted 05/12/2013 at 10:32 pm | Permalink |

          PPS. Between 2010 and 2013:
          - Australia’s population grew by 961,295 (ABS)
          - total premises (homes + businesses) grew by 531,000 (NBN Corp Plan)
          - Internet connected households grew by 2,300,000 (ABS 2010-2011 trend extrapolated to 2013)
          - Internet-connected businesses grew by 101,700 (ABS 2011-2012 trend extrapolated to 2013)

          i.e. total new internet-connected premises grew by 2,900,000, while:
          - Fixed-line connections grew by 120,000 (ABS)
          - Wireless connections grew by 2,720,000 (ABS)

          To summarise, between 2010 and 2013:
          * New internet-connected premises grew by 2.9 million
          * Total Internet subscriptions grew by 2.84 million (0.12m fixed, 2.72m wireless) Q.E.D

    19. Posted 05/12/2013 at 3:19 pm | Permalink |

      Fibroid and Steve,

      I’m guessing you two are liberal voters and have been a very long time, no?

      • steve
        Posted 05/12/2013 at 6:18 pm | Permalink |

        Does it matter? Actually no, In 2007 I was on 2.5 Mbps ADSL2 and voted for Kevin on his promise to deliver faster broadband for $4.7bn by 2013. I voted Julia in 2010 on her promise to deliver faster broadband for $44.5bn.

        In 2013 I assessed the outcome of my votes. After 6 years I was still on 2.5 Mbps ADSL and the NBN was scheduled to pass in 2019. Then I looked at the record to date. I saw that in 3 years just 300,000 homes had been passed against a planned 1.3 million, 54,000 homes had been connected against the planned 511,000, all for an investment of $7.5bn against a planned $8.6bn.

        In the previous 3 years, I saw BT roll out 80Mbps broadband to 16 million homes for $4bn. I saw New Zealand Telecom roll out 25 Mbps to 1 million homes in 2 years for a fraction. I saw AT&T and Verizon roll out 24 million homes in 2 years. And I realised one thing. Labor are lousy at keeping promises, lousy at delivery, lousy at management,lousy at budgeting and lousy at economics i.e. lousy at government. Looks like the majority of voters felt the same. Insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results.

        And you, David?

        • David
          Posted 05/12/2013 at 6:57 pm | Permalink |

          used to be

          not anymore

        • Alex (NBN)
          Posted 05/12/2013 at 7:44 pm | Permalink |

          Yes it does. IMO..

          When one’s political bigotry stands in the way of meaningful two way dialogue and rational acceptance of facts…

          As we have seen here regularly.

          For the record, I’ll say it again… IMO, FttN would certainly be advantageous to Australia in comparison to the status quo. However in comparison to FttP, which is already planned and underway, which eliminates the Telstra/copper factor, will cost the ‘government’ just $900m more than FttN, future needs, etc, etc.

          Reversing to FttN now, is absolutely fucking stupid…IMO….




    Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:


  • Most Popular Content


  • Six smart secrets for nurturing customer relationships
    [ad] Today, we are experiencing a world where behind every app, every device, and every connection, is a customer. Your customers will demand you to be where they and managing customer relationship is the key to your business’s growth. The question is where do you start? Click here to download six free whitepapers to help you connect with your customers in a whole new way.
  • Enterprise IT stories

    • NetSuite in whole of business TurboSmart deal turbosmart

      Business-focused software as a service giant NetSuite has unveiled yet another win with a mid-sized Australian company, revealing a deal with automotive performance products manufacturer Turbosmart that has seen the company deploy a comprehensive suite of NetSuite products across its business.

    • WA Health told: Hire a goddamn CIO already doctor

      A state parliamentary committee has told Western Australia’s Department of Health to end four years of acting appointments and hire a permanent CIO, in the wake of news that the lack of such an executive role in the department contributed directly to the fiasco at the state’s new Fiona Stanley Hospital, much of which has revolved around poorly delivered IT systems.

    • Former whole of Qld Govt CIO Grant resigns petergrant

      High-flying IT executive Peter Grant has left his senior position in the Queensland State Government, a year after the state demoted him from the whole of government chief information officer role he had held for the second time.

    • Hills dumped $18m ERP/CRM rollout for Salesforce.com hills

      According to a blog post published by Salesforce.com today, one of Ted Pretty’s first moves upon taking up managing director role at iconic Australian brand Hills in 2012 was to halt an expensive traditional business software project and call Salesforce.com instead.

    • Dropbox opens Sydney office koalabox

      Cloud computing storage player Dropbox has announced it is opening an office in Sydney, as competition in the local enterprise cloud storage market accelerates.

    • Heartbleed, internal outages: CBA’s horror 24 hours commbankatm

      The Commonwealth Bank’s IT division has suffered something of a nightmare 24 hours, with a catastrophic internal IT outage taking down multiple systems and resulting in physical branches being offline, and the bank separately suffering public opprobrium stemming from contradictory statements it made with respect to potential vulnerabilities stemming from the Heartbleed OpenSSL bug.

    • Android in the enterprise: Three Aussie examples from Samsung androidapple

      Forget iOS and Windows. Today we present three decently sized deployments of Android in the Australian market on Samsung’s hardware, which the Korean vendor has dug up from its archives over the past several years for us after a little prompting :)

    • Businesslink cancelled Office 365 rollout cancelled

      Microsoft has been on a bit of a tear recently in Australia with its cloud-based Office 365 platform, signing up major customers such as the Queensland Government, Qantas, V8 Supercars and rental chain Mr Rental. And it’s not hard to see why, with the platform’s hybrid cloud/traditional deployment model giving customers substantial options. However, as iTNews reported last week, it hasn’t been all plain sailing for Redmond in this arena.

    • Qld Govt inks $26.5m deal for Office 365 walker

      The Queensland State Government yesterday announced it had signed a $26.5 million deal with Microsoft which will gain the state access to Microsoft’s Office 365 software and services platform. However, with the deal not covering operating system licences and not being mandatory for departments and agencies, it remains unclear what its impact will be.

    • Hospital IT booking system ‘putting lives at risk’ doctor

      A new IT booking platform at the Austin Hospital and Olivia Newton-John Cancer and Wellness Centre in Melbourne is reportedly placing the welfare of patients with serious conditions at risk.

  • Enterprise IT, News - Apr 17, 2014 16:39 - 0 Comments

    NetSuite in whole of business TurboSmart deal

    More In Enterprise IT


    News, Telecommunications - Apr 17, 2014 11:01 - 151 Comments

    Turnbull lies on NBN to Triple J listeners

    More In Telecommunications


    Featured, Industry, News - Apr 17, 2014 9:28 - 1 Comment

    Campaign Monitor takes US$250m from US VC

    More In Industry


    Digital Rights, News - Apr 17, 2014 12:41 - 15 Comments

    Anti-piracy lobbyist enjoys cozy email chats with AGD Secretary

    More In Digital Rights