news Some of the early adopters of the Government’s preferred Fibre to the Node NBN rollout model have now resolved their problems and are achieving the speeds they were promised on the service, following pressure on the issue from Delimiter and the Opposition.
The original version of the NBN as envisioned by the previous Labor Government called for most Australian premises to be covered by a full Fibre to the Premises rollout, with the remainder to be covered by satellite and fixed wireless technology.
The Coalition’s controversial Multi-Technology Mix instituted by Malcolm Turnbull as Communications Minister has seen the company switch to a technically inferior model re-using and upgrading the legacy copper (Fibre to the Node) and HFC cable networks owned by Telstra and Optus.
Several weeks ago Delimiter published the story of Newcastle resident Robbie Gratton, an Optus FTTN customer on the National Broadband Network who detailed how his connection would slow down to almost unusable speeds during peak periods.
Later that night in Senate Estimates hearing pertaining to the NBN, former Communications Minister Stephen Conroy revealed Labor had received about 60 similar complaints so far from early adopter users of the Fibre to the Node network which the NBN company is deploying around Australia.
Gratton recently signed up for a FTTN NBN service with Optus, choosing the 100Mbps/40Mbps plan. Initially, the resident noted, he was getting very solid speeds — close to 90Mbps. However, shortly after signing up, Gratton realised that during peak hours — from 4pm to around midnight every day — his FTTN connection turns “quickly from the best connection I’ve ever had, to the worst”, with speeds slowing to as low as 1Mbps.
However, Gratton told Delimiter that following the media coverage and political agitation regarding the issues, he had suddenly over the weekend started seeing the speeds he had been paying for — with speeds rising to as much as 95Mbps.
In response to the issue, NBN chief executive Bill Morrow had stated that the speed problems were not specifically related to the Fibre to the Node platform, but were instead likely related to issues such as the the amount of capacity which each retail ISP (such as Telstra or Optus) had purchased to aggregate customer connections back to their backbone networks.
Morrow stated that it was his belief that the similar teething problems would have been seen when the NBN company first started deploying its original Fibre to the Premises model.
Gratton appeared to be pleased with the significantly faster speeds that he was receiving from the service, but displeased with the amount of effort it had taken him to get the NBN service that he had paid for.
“It only took 21 days from date of connection, multiple phone calls tech support, 3 letters to Members of Parliament, 3 news articles, a complaint to the TIO and a mention in Senate Estimates (you know, the things that every Australian is able to do), to get my NBN connection to work like it’s meant to. If the speeds hold, I’ll be a very happy user,” he said.
opinion/analysis
As I wrote when this issue first came up:
“The bottleneck in this situation would not be in the copper cable running between customer premises and neighbourhood nodes, and nor would it be likely to be in the (extremely high capacity) fibre which runs from those nodes to local telephone exchanges. Instead, the issue is likely to be in the amount of capacity which retail ISPs are provisioning to each node — how much ‘CVC’ circuit capacity they are buying from the NBN company.”
It appears that Optus, at least, has now started provisioning something close to the amount of capacity it needs in locations such as Newcastle. Let’s hope other ISPs follow suit and that we don’t have to go through this political/media pressure situation every time FTTN (or, indeed, HFC cable) is switched on in a new area.
Image credit: Parliamentary Broadcasting
Revisionist history is fascinating.
“…following pressure on the issue from Delimiter and the Opposition.”
Really, the very parties blaming FTTN technology when a couple of technically literate pointed out RSP backhaul? Will we see a retraction (re-read the abuse)? Rofl
The squealer of fanboys and their “told you so” now demolished. Perhaps FTTH was deployed in the meantime;-)
Let’s review MTM performance. Conroy/Quigley’s NBNCo launched its FTTH product 30SEP2011. In the next two years, before both removed, they’d constructed a 3.5k employee company that had passed just 154k serviceable FTTH brownfield premises.
Many would think this impossible; they developed no new technologies (all existing third party), their role just that of laying fibre (done in dozens of countries). Every year NBNCo’s senior management paid themselves bonuses despite failing to meet every meaningful target (CPP, Rollout, Revenue).
Since the FTTN’s launch 21SEP2015 the reinvented company has passed 350k serviceable. In only 5 months they’ve passed more than double NBNCo Conroy/Quigley achieved in 24.
HFC hasn’t yet been launched as a product. Expect even greater improvement.
Tech we were told that wouldn’t work; wrong copper size, jk/tucker/Ross claiming required 2-3 new powers stations.
Think of the number of squealing fanboys with taxpayer funded 4k YouTube connections today if not for Conroy/Quigley. 10m in the fixed line footprint would’ve been able to order services today.
What a policy, what waste of borrowed taxpayer money:-(
Revisionist indeed most posts said this was the likely cause you how about evidence based commenting go and quote people who said backhaul was the likely or only cause.
If everyone was saying this it will be easy!
I intentionally went out of my way to correct statements made by some blaming FTTN and told them if they are going to make those claims, that they better get the evidence as it seems to be only a few RSPs being affected.
Though, according to Richard I’m a “FTTP Fanboy squealer” so wouldn’t ever say anything like that at all…
@aj ah me when the story broke:
“Welcome RSP contention”
Then you arguing two hypothesis (node uplink, rsp provisioned backhaul) are as likely, me pointing out only if you know knowing of the tech (node components predicted by myself confirmed by cw’s photos). Way out of your league.
There were a few other’s as well. This article misses the confirmation by Morrow in very senate estimates that quotes Conroy (genius) that the tech literate were correct (as I posted at the time).
Ok fair play, CVC was the issue here – however in the medium term, the POI-Node back-haul is going to wreak havoc.
Using 80% of 192 ports, on what appears to be the most common node config (153 ports), 1/1 GigE back-haul is going to result in a maximum bandwidth, during peak loads, of a paltry 8/8 Mbps per port!! And I was being as accurate as possible and used the full layer 2 speed of 1.25 Gbps in each direction as per the GigE standard.
My quote below from the article Stop Lying
“@Richard
I agree it is more likely BUT I always believe in knowing the facts rather that using an opinion.
I will wait for the answer before jumping to conclusions unlike yourself!
I prefer facts you prefer your opinion!”
@aj you (like most here) fail to acknowledge that knowledge and experience (informed opinion) has significantly more weight. The cause called out by the few tech literate on this site, confirmed within 12 hrs by senate estimate evidence. For days articles, uninformed posts continued.
Predicted node components also confirmed (amazing;-), fanboys for days posting inaccuracies. Woman up and admit you were wrong (many “told you so” here should do the same), their bile misdirected.
@do the upgrade to 20GE trivial, node uplink is a non-issue. Agree I’m surprised 1GE (if confirmed) given the capex savings, however it isn’t an issue. Move on.
Informed opinion is important.
Political opinions like yours where you twist everything to your political opinion is not!
@Richard Yep, totally a trivial upgrade – however if confirmed, (and multiple nbn sources have told me off the record that this is the case), it just shows how low this “nbn co” will stoop to do a half assed job for the sake of saving a few bucks in the short term.
It is certainly an issue and I have no intention of moving on, as soon as the node is fully cut over to, it wont matter how well the RSP’s provision their CVC, everyone will get a crap outcome in peak use scenarios.
@aj writes “Political opinions like yours where you twist everything to your political opinion is not!”
And yet I was right (cause and components) again. Hmm
I was also correct what is your point?
You don’t seem to understand english I was talking generally.
If you were wrong you would NEVER admit it. You would twist anything and everything and ignore the truth.
For example you said
“Then you arguing two hypothesis (node uplink, rsp provisioned backhaul) are as likely,”
I point out you are lying so you twist and turn so you don’t admit you are a Liar.
You call people names and try to be condescending by saying things like Way out of your league in the hope that they will stop talking.
You have built up this little world this little story in your head and bend everything to this narrative.
RR is notorious for his delusions, has built up quite a history on Zdnet and now Delimter.
@aj when wrong I’ve admitted and corrected it. As I will in the future. Your claim is tosh then and here, as it has been when posting bile to more than a dozen of my posts in the past fortnight. Post what you like, expect it to be called out.
@brisylineboy (HC) latest “told you so” a perfect example. Just like his brisbane line conclusions, his ignorance and gullibility has him spouting his position vindicated when neither correct (loons). Never a correction (rarely a post that isn’t inane abuse), nor any contribution to the discussion. Posting on ZDNet personal details such my employer and work email address. Threatening to post phone numbers.
Stalking every post with bile is beyond tiresome. Maybe these same people will one day post an actual contribution. Throw bile and expect it to be returned (look at the posts).
My “delusions” again correct, the fanboys wrong. Man up.
Richard proved an example of admitting you are wrong?
@aj prove that I haven’t?;-)
(BT 60m vs 16m, transfer pricing vs transfer pricing benefit, secret foxtel contract details, …). Doesn’t happen as often as some, never a correction (like this article and comments).
AJ Richard will admit been wrong when he can’t spin it any other way.
Like he tried to claim the NBN didn’t write the SR and had to admit he was wrong.
Why does he have to post them? Has there been an update? You still work in South Yarra for that customer counting mob right? I won’t post your email, phone number and photo here, but isn’t it public knowledge? What do you expect when you used to use your full name?
I have to prove a negative that is the way you think isn’t it.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence hey Richard.
I meant a quote/link to the actual comment as I have provided above.
@d I posted using my full name at ZDNet for more than a decade. Most here know who I am.
What I never expected was the puerile level of debate generated by NBN fanboys (MS fanboys not even close). Maybe if I used social media I would’ve seen it coming. The vindictiveness of the know nothings across the internet is unparalleled, but it is what it is.
After years of asking for more civil debate I turned it back on them. One post (calling out the brisbane line fantasy) enough to get me banned due to the fanboy flagging of every post and regular complaints (posting links pointing out the NBN policy failures and, in particular, author errors (braue)). That post nothing near the level of abuse I sustained there or (worst) here on a regular basis.
Work successfully reinventing the counting company (hardware, software, datacentre, accounts) completed a year ago, moving onto the next projects soon (after a year backpacking developing countries).
Oops, sorry Clayton. Moved from South Yarra, or just bad memory. It was years ago you were trolling ZDNet under your full name.
Well….ya could just stop doing it, ya know…
@R Sorry Richard, I’ve seen many of your posts here and on ZDNet, and I think you are guilty of what you claim others are doing. Your one eyed support of all things LNP and against all things Labor is so obvious, who do you think you are kidding trying to deny that it is your underlying motivation. Your free to have your opinions, no matter how tenuous or divorced from reality it is, but the constant trolling, the accusations of political motivations to people who don’t share your one eyed perspective is frankly, just a pain in the arse. Some here enjoy discussion and counter view points and reasons put forward for them, but not trolling crap from some one eye LNP fanboi. Sorry, you may have some valid points now and then, but most posters treat you as a joke because you, well you are. Your political bias just colours everything you write. Most of yours post are gloating, childish bait, trying to get a rise out of people. What do you expect. If you want to have a reasonable argument about the merits of various solutions stop acting like a immature little kid.
Darren,
+1
So Dick (sorry 60m passed boy).
Let’s get this right, you need to go back 5 or 6 years (or whatever it was) for something that has SFA to do with any comms topic whatsoever, just to (unwarranted) continually criticise HC to appease your own HUGE ego?
You were asked at the time, WTF are you on about as you were actually corresponding completely off topic, with someone else entirely?
Regardless, LOL… you can’t find anything topical or recent? Such as your recent gem? The ridiculously desperate attempt to intentionally wrongfully claim 60m premises were passed in the UK to support the cause – which would have gone through to the keeper unless I corrected you (whilst pointing and laughing, of course)?
Gee the self proclaimed numbers guru beyond compare, second to none (just ask him) was only 44m out… 16m or 60m give or take, (quick deflection, but Quigley said, but CP16, but Conjob said)…ROFL.
Nothing, to to disprove HC (or I) as we told you and keep telling you, the plan you could have been commissioned to write is a fuckup? So you just rattle off Brissyline boy, mixed with idiot conservative and NBN™ propaganda (from CP16 *sigh*) and Lib.org, as if gospel?
Really is anyone that ignorant, narcissistic, blinded and/or stupid? Apparently it’s an overwhelming yes there Dick.
Even after having witnessed NBN™ admitting to 4 year hold -ups and UPTO (love the upto to appease the worms…lol) $27B more than the fully costed, ready to go plan, you still maintain YOUR plan is a winner… RIIIIIGGGHHHTTT
My I’m not the only one who has butthurt that HUGE ego eh?
BTW, still insisting that 1Mb is more than enough for anything a home user should need a network connection for? You remember, back in the days when the LNP had no NBN policy and were claiming it wasn’t needed. Of course anyone suggesting that home users would in fact need more than 1Mb was put in their place. How dare those ignorant plebs question your great knowledge and wisdom.
@d writes
“BTW, still insisting that 1Mb is more than enough for anything a home user should need a network connection for?”
Perfect example of the absolute rubbish.
Indeed Rizz. Apparently he is also too ignorant to comprehend what exactly the “I told you so” was referencing. He can continue with the delusions if it pleases him (that and Abels “Brisbane line” crap). Not that matters or is of any relevance but it’s good to know I’m keeping him awake at night again. The same irrationally displayed at Zdnet now on Delimiter for all to see.
So Richard
FTTN/B over building FTTN/B is Conroy vision.
Oh wait Turnbull said poorly served area only if they are are only prioritised if its economic or commercially viable. So the ones you claimed should be covered first won’t because be uses they wouldn’t by portly served if it was economic or commercially viable. But apparently that’s Conrony fault too is it.
So how cheap when cost of best know figures available is only 14% cheaper to rollout. If it’s $1B cheaper than the inflated figures of the SR will it still be money well spent.
So Conroy should had hit reset because the gorilla in the room had a change of management. You claimed there where $B to be invested yet the gorilla didn’t jump at the chance with gov assistance.
@d writes
“Your one eyed support of all things LNP and against all things Labor is so obvious…”
Yet dozens of my posts calling out both parties failures and (few) comparative successes. NBN policy (all parties) is a failure, as predicted from the beginning. Obvious failures denied by others.
That the MTM is performing as expected (faster rollout, less cost) doesn’t make the policy sensible (my PWC valuation posts). But retort of political bias all that’s thrown back.
“…the accusations of political motivations to people who don’t share your one eyed perspective is frankly, just a pain in the arse.”
When have I claimed others’ political motivations? Again dozens of posts accusing me, regularly denied. They’ve even claimed I’m Turnbull, regularly claiming I’m paid to post. Care for a link?
True fanboys are offended by anything that challenges their uninformed position. I’m on the record as supporting their right to challenge, but expect to defend their views. Nothing but bile their retort. Claiming knowledge in areas (tech, economics, financials) when they don’t even have the basics. Never a single figure or supporting evidence, many proudly boosting of their lack of qualifications.
It’s impossible to counter my imagined position by the groupthink (more joining). I’m small govt not because of ideology, a camp I find myself after a history of their continued failure. Then few here know anything of the topic (libertarianism) nor alternatives, unable to recognise their own categorisation.
Agreed the fanboys want only their position represented. Look at the posts following Renai’s perfectly reasonable ABC’s Ross not gagged conclusion. Only +1 to banal posts.
Not one of the many fanboy posters exposed by this FTTN congestion story has fessed up. Not one correction, demanding of me what I’ve actually done and they never do. Fanboys!
So Richard is FTTN 8k a week rollout is rolling out faster than FTTP. Thanks to your 60M I mean 16m BT pasted in 6 years the MTM should have been completed the FTTN by now in its 3rd year.
But it’s really funny your claiming FTTN rollout is faster when it slower.
But Richard how is the MTM performing as expected when the SR had 4.5m homes connected by the end of the year now it’s only 2.5m homes.
Or do you mean that the failure of MTM is performing as expected. $27B blowout and counting in 2 years. Bonuses paid. End of year target missed by 2m homes bonus paid.
But Darren is right you can’t have any criticism of a policy you could have been commission to write with out pointing finger at the pervious management.
Err Dick (60m passed boy).
For every so called comment “calling out” i.e. taking to the Coalition and ‘your own plan’ obviously apologetically and with a feather, there are hundreds of copy/pasted spiels severely and unfairly attacking the last mob, their plan, Quigley etc.
It’s like you only get the feather out for precious conservatives occasionally, as a token gesture to try to excuse the rest of your unwarranted, blind ideological attacks. You know, no I don’t always criticise the others and not the current…
This is, technically correct.
There I agree with you. Something you have never done with me because you simply wish to be Abbott-esque and oppose for the fucking sake of opposing/arguing.
But Mr numbers, 99% attacking one lot (whilst excusing the others for doing the same but worse) and then attacking the others 1% but doing it so veiled it may as well not occur, doesn’t cut the mustard.
And yes I am biased too.
But not for dumb subservient political/ideological reasons as is obvious with you my friend, I believe following educating myself to the FACTS, that FTTP is what Australia (me, my family and you and your family etc) needs Dick.
The iron wires are no longer good enough, “again” (see what I did there)?
Whereas, you believe Australia needs whatever the conservative politicians say (including the iron wires) we need, proven by you stating we don’t need FTTP speeds and suggesting the Coalition’s plan (UPTO 25mbps for now – well 2020 rather) is the right amount. Yet you laud all of these so called add ons to give us that extra speed you already claimed we don’t need..?
Like fair enough give it to the last mob where deserved, as we did re: CVC, POIS (although more an ACCC issue) internet filtering etc. But while ever you keep ignoring, glossing over or excusing the even greater downfalls of the current (easier) faster, cheaper and their 4 years/$27B cost blowout (over the fully costed plan)…all on the back of NBNCo’s (as opposed to NBN ™) groundwork, you seriously have no credibility.
I guess I probably should have just gone and said this to the neighbour’s dog, because at least he has an open mind and won’t just bark as you do Dick, for no rational reason…
@rizz I’ve always called out the losses expected for both plans. Tens of billions wasted on this folly (a massive amount of money), coming up to its 7th anniversary yet 15% complete, $16+b sunk. The company is forecast to lose over $2-3b for every year covered by CP16, unimaginable losses for a basic (if large scale) telco project. NBNCo will never make a dollar, called out from the beginning.
There’s much of the MTM I support, such as infrastructure reuse. Article after article showing its viability, plus many realworld overseas examples. Losses from MTM will be tens of billions less than than the original plan.
I reject “unfairly” calling out Quigley’s management. No management can underperform as much as they did and not be held accountible. These people were paid millions a year (plus objectionably bonuses)! The policy itself responsible for today’s predicament, however I’ve also said Turnbull’s buy in makes him also responsible.
Everyone’s a product of their knowledge and experience. Bias is unavoidable. I acknowledged mine years ago. Note I’m note a conservative.
Asked the speeds I believe required I gave the my figures. Nothing to do with coalition policy. I’m supportive of ubiquitous internet, employed in IT for more than 25 years and in the Internet space since developing the Financial Times’ web platform in 90s. However I believe (and defend) such an outcome could’ve been achieved in a better way (as has been outlined).
If the commenters here want a civil discussion I’m all for it. I don’t expect many to agree with my position, nor me theirs. Along the way we’ll learn something (knowledged many contributions myself). I’ve had several civil debates on both sites, but if offered up nothing but abuse expect it to be returned or called out. Many months ago I actually praised your restraint, that it disintegrated I’m just as responsible. Happy to start again.
@ Richard, firstly apologies for the length of this post – hopefully the old TL;DR won’t kick in.
“I reject “unfairly” calling out Quigley’s management.”
And herein lies the problem IMO. The safety net as is clearly the case with a conservative mindset, blame the others (NBNCo or gov) for everything bad and laud ourselves for everything good.
I guess that’s why we forever hear such people and pollies blaming the last mob (NBNCo/gov) for everything, as they have done SFA which is good, themselves.
See Richard I believe you have it arse up. The 4 year MTM hold ups and cost blow out are NOT Quigley’s fault. In comparison Quigley had a start up and built it up from the ground (the others now don’t have to worry about doing that) and Quigley managed the harder, slower (apparently) FTTP NBNCo better than the faster, cheaper (apparently), MTM/NBN™ is managed now.
Did Quigley have 4 year time frame blowout and up to $27B cost blow out (up to a massive $15B hole, from one doc to the next)?
Yes or no…? Let me, NO – he did not, but Morrow does…. So, what’s the answer? As I said blame the last mob… then place fingers in ears and suggest everyone else ignorant. Brilliant.
You say of Quigley & Co…
“No management can underperform as much as they did and not be held accountible. These people were paid millions a year (plus objectionably bonuses)!”
Yet you laud and “do not hold accountable” the 4 year/$27B blow out guy, who didn’t have to build NBNCo/NBN™ from scratch, who is rolling out the faster, cheaper (apparently) MTM network who (iirc) base salary is $3m pa which is $1m p.a over and above Quigley (who as you’ll remember donated his first years salary to charity).
So when are you going to “call out” NBN™ woefully worse management outcomes, instead of lauding their revisions (ergo excusing their blowouts because, well they have been revised, rather than saying WTF, as you did and do with Quigleys better outcomes) ?
Revisions which also allow them to (possibly) meet their future lowest of lowball revised roll out targets? Remember apples/apples, NBN™ are rolling out the substantially faster/cheaper network (apparently)… so it actually needs to be substantially faster and cheaper, not minimally faster and cheaper. Otherwise this totally blows that entire argument (the argument where shh there’s no B in cBa) out of the water and demonstrates again the folly of halting FTTP roll out for a retrograde roll out, not substantially faster or cheaper and certainly less beneficial.
I’ll reiterate, for me… I was to have had FTTP in Sept 2014, but I still do not have FTTN… ergo for me (and probably 100’s of 1000’s if not millions of others) taking into account timeframe blowouts on both topologies, FTTN is NOT faster (roll out wise – we know it pales in actual speeds) for us.
Richard without wishing to again open old wounds (since you offered the olive branch generically)… IMO if you could quell your obvious hatred of anything left of far right.. I believe we may get somewhere.
In return I’ll reread the MTM plan and try to see if there are any plusses after all. Because I really don’t think there are many TBH. There only seem to be plusses for those ideologically opposed to universal FTTP being supplied by a lefty government, so we must do differently.
Which I find sad, because if the Coalition were doing FTTP I’d still be here talking it up and I’d bet you, the usual suspects et al and myself would all then be on the same side.
That’s your problem Richard, you have said so much over the years and so many half truths so many contradictions and so many inaccuracies it’s impossible to keep abreast of what you say. Your posts here are 20, and heavens knows how may more on other blogs. Your posts are more like long winded raving rants then objective statements.
@rizz what good has come of the NBN?
If you give me tens of billions of taxpayers money I’ll start company with 3.5k employees. Why does anyone here think that’s difficult. The likely outcome for most is the dysfunction created by Quigley. Conroy should have engaged the telcos better, the only partners capable to deliver a project of this scale. He didn’t, outcome entirely as I predicted.
Again I’m not a conservative.
I didn’t set NBNCo targets, their management did. I pointed out their failures as information became available. They continued to claim on time and budget as late as April 2013. This is demonstratively untrue.
I’ve been very critical of the cost blowouts of the new management, predicted them before CP16 released and predicting revenue the next target to fail (add billions more to losses, indefinite).
As I’ve always posted; what if the majority of benefits can be captured faster and much less cost? Infrastructure reuse works in most markets (majority), performance in every case infinitely better than NBNCo actuals (already shown in the MTM). NBN policy a disaster, infrastructure reuse a small win. Cost to taxpayers will be tens of billions.
Where the ideology/political bias comes in, is that you’re the only one that believes their cooked books and voodoo accounting…
Thanks for the reply Richard, especially since we have agreed to play nicely, at last :)
“@rizz what good has come of the NBN?”
1. No good has come of the NBN (seems we agree). However I certainly don’t agree as to why.
Pre NBN we had stagnation, lazy private enterprise (Telstra) making obscene profits from the copper, unwilling to invest (remember 2005/06 talking FTTN but that’s all it was, talk… and later their non-compliant RFP NBN bid in 2008 iirc) and lazy retailers buying form Telstra wholesale, not interested in investing (even though the G9 promised the world, but then didn’t even bid during the RFP to build the original NBN) because they had a god given right to the copper.
As such they were “all” happy to continue the snouts in the trough copper status quo, whilst the rest of the world left us behind.
This meant if Australia was to move on from the analogy of iron wires to the next logical medium to take us forward, as copper did with iron, as private enterprise were lazily happy with the status quo/uninterested in investing (as outlined above) it “needed and warranted” government intervention.
Like although I take the piss, you are not a silly man, quite the contrary :) So surely you can see this or at least consider it ?
So enter the not a cent more than $4.7B (or was it $4.9B) RFP to build an NBN)…
But again as aforementioned, private enterprise showed disinterest, even with subsidies etc. Telstra were ruling the roost and deciding what they wanted to do, to again enshrine their god given right to monopolise and the others just weren’t again willing to take Telstra on (following the $B’s lost on the Telstra/Optus HFC folly). So no one stepped up to the plate, so to speak.
With this we needed NBN M2 – FTTP, which would largely bypass the obstructionist Telstra, leaving all RSP’s a more level playing field. We would have had NBNCo the network wholesaler and RSP’s as retailers (much like most other business models, importer/wholesalers/supplies/retailers) I.e. we did away with the Telstra wholesaler/retailer vertical integration hands around our nations throat, which hampered our progress for so long, to move forward.
But just as it all got going, the Abbott factor kicked in where whatever the other’s did, he opposed and ridiculed.
In hindsight, from that point on, no matter what, the NBN was doomed… which lead us to MTM, which IMO is a failure. Like seriously even those rolling it out in 2016 referred to it as fraudband in 2007.
That either tells us they lied as it isn’t fraudband after all, or they lied because it is fraudband, but now telling us it isn’t Or they lied either way so as to attack their opponents. All equating to err, lies…
And keeping that in mind, why wouldn’t any rational person ask, hey if they lied about FTTN maybe they are lying about FTTP too?
IMO had the original NBN continued it would all now be rosy, but instead we have MTM, which again IMO, is anything but rosy.
2. “again I’m not a conservative”
Fair enough, I’ll take your word as a gentlemen.
But in doing so, I’ll just say that me, as someone who sits centre, but with a social conscience (read heart – I don’t think the disabled should have their meagre earnings taken from them whilst billionaire miners pay no tax) considers your views as very dry!
3. “I didn’t set NBNCo targets, their management did. I pointed out their failures as information became available.”
No of course you didn’t Richard you were too busy writing the failed MTM plan ;). But at least you could acknowledge at least what Quigley said. His targets were “very aggressive” because for such a build, suggesting marshmallow targets so easily attained, was ridiculous (until MTM of course ;). Yes you pointed out that they didn’t quite make those targets, but don’t seem to point out the apparent fatster/cheaper MTM rollout is going worse (blown from 2016 to 2020).
4. “I’ve been very critical of the cost blowouts of the new management…”
No you haven’t. You’ve been extremely critical of Quigley & Co somewhat behind and a little critical of Morrow ™ being heaps behind and $B’s over budget (remembering again – this is the supposed cheaper faster network)!
5. “As I’ve always posted; what if the majority of benefits can be captured faster and much less cost?”
Yes and what if they can’t? Ever thought of that. Seriously I know I dwell but think iron wires and tell me in hindsight, could we have benefitted as much from beefing the iron wires up too.
It’s not a loaded analogy, but you having explained in hindsight why the copper was needed and the iron superseded, I would have thought in foresight you could again see the same analogy.
But hey if we all had the same views we’d have nothing to do here and Renai would unemployed (sorry R).
Have a nice day Richard :)
“Look at the posts following Renai’s perfectly reasonable ABC’s Ross not gagged conclusion.”
You mean the pay-for click bait article he wrote while Ross’ revelations of being gagged were in the process of being revealed, and only days later was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt?
“Not one correction, demanding of me what I’ve actually done”
Rubbish. I called you out on your (continued) sexism, as just one of many small examples.
@rizz playing nice is much appreciated.
Anyone that’s worked with me would acknowledge i’m always challenging preconceptions, inventing new ways to do things. Socially I’m not conservative in anyway, however economically I’m free market because of the benefits. You’re more of an interventionist.
It’s important to look after the disadvantaged (we agree), the easiest way is to construct a productive economy to pay for it. I’ve backpacked more than half the world, experiencing the best and worst. Govt intervention dominates the poorest.
It’s not possible for a few to support the desires of everyone, we can only show a way.
Pre-NBN the problem was the three amigos and Conroy’s approach. However they’d said adios before NBNCo was even formed, new management receptive to working with govt (as we’ve seen). Conroy should’ve reset, he pushed ahead regardless. He and his expert panel underestimated the challenge, pointed out at the time and since.
A competive telco market would have seen fibre pushed closer to homes, customer demand and available revenue guarantees it. Today we have NBNCo overbuilding high-speed infrastructure in well serviced markets (a continuation of Conroy’s plan).
NBNCo costs blowing out well in excess of available revenue. Competitive technologies advancing risking revenue.
“Today we have NBNCo overbuilding high-speed infrastructure in well serviced markets (a continuation of Conroy’s plan).”
Please cite where NBNCo planned to overbuild better existing technologies with FTTN pre-2013.
You do realize that Quigley and Co had to create a company, design a network and roll out the transit network before they could start connecting premises? No? Well surprise, surprise, you were mislead.
How much did Quigley take in salary and performance bonuses?
How much does Morrow take?
@a they didn’t have to do any of the things claimed, they choose to. Decisions, pointed out at the time, were well beyond their (very limited) capabilities (actual performance proved it).
Despite failing performance (against target they themselves set) they paid themselves bonuses.
Morrow earns many times more, his relative performance justifying the decision. High income earners challenged all the time, typically (outside the public sector) accountable for their performance.
Yet Richard we have Morrow missing 2 targets for this year.
And what about that target 25 Mb to every residence by the end of 2016 by Turnbull.
Yes, he is doing an admirable job cutting costs to the bone to earn his bonuses. Luckily this time it’s at the expense of Australian’s future prosperity rather than lives. I doubt it can explode like a gas line.
“@a they didn’t have to do any of the things claimed, they choose to. Decisions, pointed out at the time, were well beyond their (very limited) capabilities (actual performance proved it).”
Technically NBN Co did have to do that, you are conflating issues again between Labor and NBN Co.
NBN Co had to follow their instructions from the then Government, Labor chose to build a new GBE, Labor chose the policy direction, NBN Co was then created to realise said policy.
So yes, NBN Co (Quigley and Co) did HAVE to do all of that, Labor however, did not. So to claim that it is apples and apples when Morrow et al inherited a 95% complete transit network, an already up and running GBE and relations with the construction companies rolling out the network already in place…. is completely disingenuous.
“they didn’t have to do any of the things claimed, they choose to”
Quote of the year
@r0 “Quigley and Co” choose to join NBNCo, they were the policy’s biggest cheerleaders.
The few net taxpayers with no choice, extorted to pay for yet another policy folly.
“@r0 “Quigley and Co” choose to join NBNCo, they were the policy’s biggest cheerleaders.”
So… your argument is that because the staff chose to work at NBNCo, that they then chose to do all those things and didn’t HAVE to because they could have chosen to not take the job?
That wouldn’t have changed anything, other people would have been hired instead and the same policy would have been followed, by other people.
Thus the situation that Morrow walked into in 2013 would be the same, he would have walked into an already built GBE with the majority of the transit network already built and relationships already forged regarding the rollout.
It is still apples and oranges. Debating that they had a choice to do that or not is deflecting. It doesn’t matter if they had the choice, it doesn’t matter that they could have chosen to not work at NBN Co, they did, the conversation is about what Morrow walked into compared to what Quigley started with, and they are two entirely different places.
@r0 In the real-world (not your imaginary one), senior management (including the CEO) have many choices.
It was his choice to join NBNCO, his choice to adopt their failed contractor model and select inexperienced contractors, his choice of a complicated network design, his choice not to speek out in favour of FTTB when MDU (30+% of premises RFS) all left without a connection, his choice to redefine RFS and invent the construction commensed metric, his choice to make on time and budget statements that weren’t true.
If other people had been hired then they’d be blamed for their decisions, however Quigley and Co were hired and he’s responsible for his decisions.
“If other people had been hired then they’d be blamed for their decisions, however Quigley and Co were hired and he’s responsible for his decisions.”
You are still deflecting and ignoring the point. The point is not about the choice, the point is the situation that Morrow inherited is not comparable to the situation that Quigley walked into.
Morrow walked into an established company that was already underway rolling out a network, with significant infrastructure already constructed.
You can keep harping on about choices and whether those choices were good or bad, but that isn’t actually the point when someone says that comparing NBN Co at its inception to NBN Co when Morrow took over and thus comparing the two rollouts, is apples and oranges.
You will undoubtedly find something else in this comment to deflect with and avoid discussing the actual point being made.
@r0 I get it, you cant understand a simple post (deja vu).
Morrow walked into a completely dysfunctional company (failing on every of their KPIs), the turnaround has been impressive. The policy (govt wholesale monopoly) continuing as an expensive folly.
@Richard, who is the one who cannot understand a simple post?
You’re still deflecting from the topic. I don’t care about your analysis of whether NBN Co was performing well under the previous management or not, it has no bearing on my point. I haven’t said Morrow has done badly managing the company, I haven’t said Quigley was perfect and Morrow is terrible.
My point is: Quigley walked into a blank slate. Morrow walked into a company that was already established.
Whether Morrow has performed well or not, is not my point, my point is they started from very different places, so comparing what Quigley did in X years and what Morrow did in X years regarding actual rollout to premises is largely irrelevant.
@ Dick.
“Morrow walked into a completely dysfunctional company (failing on every of their KPIs), the turnaround has been impressive. The policy (govt wholesale monopoly) continuing as an expensive folly.”
Blind ideological BS…
Anyone who refuses to acknowledge (or even worse use a revision to excuse) the MTM hold-ups (promised 2016 – now 2020) and promised fully costed $29B plan now UPTO $27B more, is either a puppet or a fool.
As such the jury is still out
Richard missing the point?? No wai!!!
You can’t answer what Quigley took in bonuses, obviously.
@a obviously!
Senior management remuneration is included in their companies’ annual reports (eg AR15p48).
That is great
but what about the rest of us
i am on FTTP and my 100/40 is more like 10/40 in peak times
each POI is different, they fix 1 POI and not the others
“they fix 1 POI and not the others”
They being the RSPs right? Since it is entirely your RSP and not the hardware.
Who is your RSP? That might illuminate the issue somewhat.
Wait… so, was the issue between the node and the exchange, or the exchange and the ISP? Do ISP’s need to pay for a connection to each node? I thought NBN Co did all of the cost bringing data back to the POI’s (or exchanges) and then the ISP’s are responsible for it from there.
Backhaul of data from each node to the POI is covered under the CVC. At a high level the CVC provides a single bandwidth pool that all RSP services in the POI area share. Nbn then provide the underlying infrastructure in order to deliver against this.
Renai,
Optus is just playing the game of politics. I’ve had to resolve issues for VIP’s for years and know full well the bags of tricks Telcos have when they go about “fixing” things like this.
A key one is altering the QoS and priority of services. They can effectively ensure that particular end-users traffic is prioritised over that of others.
It is highly unlikely that Optus provisioned new bandwidth at the NBN Newcastle PoI. Its exceedingly expensive and somewhat silly to upgrade a congested PoI. In actual fact the problem are the customers.
See back when we had shitty ADSL services with that variable layer 1 sync rate and line run customers behaved different with the knowledge that they would never get 10-20mbps of bandwidth all the time. They used their internet in entirely different ways.
However on upgrading to the NBN everyone seems to have been taken in by the marketing hyperbole. That’s why Turnbull has championed MTM and VDSL. We need users to percieve that they don’t have a Porsche but rather a 2-litre Hyundai, and instead of driving at 180kph every where they go he needs them to do 80kph whilst driving down the motorway.
Don’t ya know only the important people get to go fast?0
0
I have seen many a case where VIP’s have received a far superior service because they either got into the ear of the right people or were friends/family of the executives/board of the telco.
These few dozen complainants raised by the ALP are easily resolved by simply altering their QoS. It gives the perception something was done without almost any cost.
You need to ask Optus exactly what did they do to resolve Gratton’s issue. If they’re coy, refuse to say basically then I guarantee you they have simply disadvantaged several hundred end-users just so Gratton could have a better service (and more then likely over the next 6-18months they’ll slowly restore his service back to the UBR style QoS everyone else is on.
I’d suggest the argument needs to go up a level.
There needs to be better disclosure of actual internet performance from consumer ISPs. The ACCC Broadband performance monitoring & reporting program should be taken up and rolled out. Currently different ISPs can market services as equivalent where their actual performance may differ noticeably. This has to stop.
The MTM approach can work well (in my case it does – FTTN with 40/22 line rate & consistent Speedtest results to match). The nbn approach isn’t the problem, it’s decisions being made by ISPs around how to architect their networks.
@mr or save the millions of recurrent expensive (more public servants) and require RSP’s publish their provisioned CSV and backhaul for the market to decide (Adam Smith’s invisible hand).
It’s funny though, $16+b spent and Conroy’s policy has the same issues for end users (RSP contention). To be fair he did call for his massively inefficient thought-bubble further into the network (eg taxpayer owned undersea fibre capacity;-)
@Richard – arguably you see these type of issues anywhere. If a network is not architected & setup properly, you will see these sort of issues. MTM has nothing to do with that (as mentioned above & elsewhere – people are also getting poor performance on FTTP).
Getting ISPs to self-report is fraught with danger. You need a method that allows a straight-forward comparison between services (similar to what the ACCC approach was looking at).
@mr NBNCo (third party) can publish AVC & CVC capacity for each RSP by PoI. For backhaul bandwidth require a statutory declaration from RSP (criminal penalties apply).
What’s “fraught with danger” is another incompetent govt dept (sadly the immediate reaction from all political parties today). The outcome is entirely predictable.
While I agree with knowing the contention ratios that RSPs are using would be good for consumers, NBN Co simply releasing how much CVC each RSP is purchasing is only going to tell half the story.
Without knowing how many customers an RSP has on a given PoI you can then only speculate on their contention ratio.
@r0 maybe AVC & backhaul should be included in the reporting, oh wait;-)
The ignorance of the stalkers is simply amazing (what next?).
Agreed R0, nbn should publish something along these Lines per RSP:
1/ Total CVC purchased per POI
2/ # of Customers per POI
3/ Break down of Speed Tiers by # of Customers
Then we will see who the decent RSP’s are and who to avoid and we might even create a healthy race to the top by the “premium” ISP’s.
@Richard, I admit I did skim read your comment and missed the AVC portion, but good to know you will still attack me and call me a “stalker” when I am essentially supporting your position.
And you accuse me of being a fanboy? Hahahahaha. Classic Richard.
Dick… does your CEO know that you spend all day doing politics, by trying to desperately justify a failure MTM network here on Delimiter, rather than doing what you are supposed to… ?
Why ? Exclusively because your HUGE ego, is unable to accept the fuckup that is MTM (EXACTLY as we told you, it would be) …
Why? Because you claimed you could have been commissioned to write this MTM fuckup and need to defend the MTM fuckup all day everyday, instead of just admitting the MTM fuck up you could have been commissioned to write is an MTM fuckup and then just doing what you should be doing?
But…
Narcissism says no.
Stalkers?
Apparently I’m a stalker (too) according to Dick (60m passed boy).
But ATM, he’s posted 15 comments to my 3 (now 4).
Gotta love the endless mix of hypocrisy, narcissism and dare one say, obvious stupidity in such posts.
@rizz doesn’t know the meaning of stalker either?
I rest my case…
@Rizz
Nailed it!
Certainly not fixed in my area.
I am still getting less than 1Mbps on a TPG 100/40 FTTN connection during peak times and weekends.
“TPG” There’s your problem.
puerile…
Always one TPG fanboi
Hmm.
Let’s see if the PMG mk2 approach across extended metro to remote will survive till 2020.
Wasn’t the whole point of the LyingN(C)P’s pitch at the 2013 federal election a nbn MTM mk3, as in nbn would determine the technology used, not some Liebor diktaat and GAFW-oriented bureaucrazy in Versailles on Lake Blwxyz Griffin?
Moreover single or a group of premise(s) can get guestimates out of nbn to get FTTx taken to FTTP instead?
Ie, either
FTTx (be it shared or direct 2.5GPON FTTP for now,
FTTB or FTTN with VDSL2,
may be FTTDP with G.Fast/
HFC (given that is what I am on, I can’t wait to see a timetable for DOCSIS3.1, over Wi-Fi generally get 31/ 1.5 Mbps and now have a 500 GB quota which seems to work fine for now, teenagers, Netflix and AppleTV, and even an email/ browsing only neighbour on our guest network)/
fixed terrestrial wireless (I note that SingTel Optus/ Huawei tested 4.5G at 1.4 Gbps the other week near Newcastle NSW, and previously that they have a 4G 50 GB plan in market, which would be overkill for the neighbour) or
satellite wireless.
Sooner, faster, “fast enough by …”
Mind you, since we’ve seen a Netflix Tax, OzLog/ Mandatory Metadata Retention, and more nbn oopsies.
I reckon the short term problem is not enough PoI to comms provider network capacity (rather than premise to PoI), probably due to nbn’s CVC/ usage/ capacity charge of AUD/$17.50 per Mbps?
And that is with three quarters of active premises on nbn being on 25/ 5 Mbps or slower.
As others have pointed out the fix could have been more capacity or traffic management.
Longer term it’ll, see Jxeeno’s blog, be interesting to see what happens to congestion if more than a quarter of premises order 100/ 40 Mbps or more.
Still checking to see if it’s April 1… one guy sees improvement, all is good… jees…
We had a similar problem with CVC capacity for two months after our NBN FTTH connection was activated. Luckily Internode wasn’t shy about buying extra CVC capacity to resolve the issue. Other ISP’s have been less receptive to their customers needs just for the sake of saving a buck.
the focus should be on CVC cost, not the delivery method.
im disappointed Labor/Delimiter/Renai dont address this elephant-in-the-room more directly.. the “60 FTTN complaints” is not a direct and NBN FTTN issue, it’s clearly an RSP and should be looked at by the ACCC, not parliament.
CVC cost obscene. whats the point of building an NBN network, when the cost of supplying for many RSP is higher than ADSL?
Take those ISPs with their own ADSL DSLAMs, their costs were flat. they pay for the telstra copper line and total capacity from exchange, not per MB. hence why the like of TPG, Dodo could offer <$60 unlimited.
the NBN model is per MB… so costs are no longer flat and unlimited is not capped.
how about we build the NBN to the taxpayers model (and the rest of the world), not telstra's shareholders preferred model!!
“CVC cost obscene. whats the point of building an NBN network, when the cost of supplying for many RSP is higher than ADSL?”
Agree, absolutely always been a bug bear with both NBN’s…
But more importantly re: the big picture IMO, why spend as much as $56B on a network which also isn’t that much more superior to ADSL, regardless of the (all important) intricacies such as CVC?
“How about we build the NBN to the taxpayers model (and the rest of the world), not telstra’s shareholders preferred model!!”
Agree again… just like the previous one we had (with CVC and POI issues addressed).
So it wasn’t lack of backhaul, it was to do with RSP’s CVC costs.
What about the ROI being 2-3% and the cost jumping from 29 billion/3 years to 57 billion/7-8 years?
If this is their idea of success, can I sign on and get a bonus for doubling the budget/time frame?
So you got 1 thing right Richard -what about the other issues with this policy?
For an analyst you are very one sided – as a business analyst I always research all facets of a project – by any metric the MTM is a failure.
@j not CVC pricing, it’s a lack of provisioned CVC and/or backhaul to the PoI.
The coalition pre-election policy in tatters (as was Labor’s). I’ve criticised the FW deployment (contracts excluding technological alternatives)and required copper maintence in the most expensive CAN zones (paid for with 20yr USO contract extension), number of PoI (too few) and expensive transit, its satellites (not tendered, service delayed), it’s cross subsidy model (now proposed levy on non-NBN data services), revenue not matching cost blowouts, overbuilding competitive infrastructure, not targeting poorly serviced areas, …
The policy a disaster (all parties).
I don’t think Labors policy was a disaster at all except for not using FTTB for apartment buildings.
IIRC, all the Liberals did was cry “WHITE ELEPHANT” and how they would “Tear up the NBN”
It really is a White Elephant now under the LNP.
Well Chris they did give it a fitting name of fraudband
That and Labor should have been more amenable to reusing the HFC, and other infrastructure, while building FttP in area’s that had poor BB to start with.
+1 I’m actually really angry at Labor for not giving in on FTTB, it would have saved their NBN IMO. Rollout would have been so much further along if they used the same (legally correct) demarcation Telstra always has, instead of choosing to subsidise bodies corporate to the tune of billions of dollars.
Other than that, FTTN (streetside) will be a disaster though.
Come Coalition tweeters
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside ragin’
It’ll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the Polls they are a-changin
(Newspoll 50/50)
Comments are closed.