Shadow Communications Minister Turnbull appears to have returned from an impromptu study tour of the telecommunications facilities in Asian countries with fresh ammunition for Australia’s own broadband debate, pointing out that global broadband giant South Korea has maintained both HFC cable and fibre options for residents.
Telstra is currently negotiating with NBN Co to stop providing broadband over its HFC cable network, which is capable of delivering up to 100Mbps speeds, as it migrates customers onto the predominantly fibre-based NBN. And Optus has been reported to have been in similar negotiations, although the SingTel subsidiary has repeatedly refused to comment on whether it will shut down its own HFC network.
But on Radio 2UE today, Turnbull linked the availability of both fibre and HFC cable in some locations in South Korea to the concept of facilities-based competition, which has long been advocated as providing true competition in Australia’s telecommunications sector.
“I was just in Korea where there was obviously very fast broadband there and talking to legislators and parliamentarians and Ministers and regulators about it,” Turnbull said. “One of their high priorities is ensuring wherever they can facilities-based competition so that you’ve got a choice between providers of broadband services who have got their own hardware, their own cables if you like, into the basement of your apartment building.”
“People in an apartment building will typically have a range of broadband providers – some fibre, some HFC cable – so there’s a degree of tension and competition.”
Turnbull said the objective of the National Broadband Network should be to deliver fast broadband to all Australians at an affordable price. “And the way you get an affordable price is through competition so why seek to stamp out the competition from the HFC cable?” he asked.
Both Telstra and Optus have continued to upgrade their HFC cable networks over the past year, despite the fact that the NBN fibre — offering higher speeds and better latency will start to hit millions of Australian premises over the next several years.
In August last year, Optus completed a substantial upgrade of its HFC cable network in Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney that is allowing residents in supported areas access to speeds up ranging up to around 80Mbps or more, using the improved DOCSIS 3 standard. And in July Telstra almost doubled the theoretical speeds on its HFC cable network in a clutch of cities around Australia, pushing the network from 17Mbps to 30Mbps.
However, some in the telecommunications industry — such as NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley, who said during the election last year that cable was a “souped up version of copper” — with the problem that bandwidth on HFC networks was shared between those connecting to it, in contrast with the last leg mile of fibre to the home.
Image credit: Attilio Ivan, royalty free
CAN < HFC < NBN
CAN < HFC < NBN
CONROY < MICHAEL < MALCOLM
also
NBN < HFC < CAN
In terms of price
So the definition of “better” or “worse depends entirely on your metric? Thanks for clearing that up!
Exactly, you got to the point. Some people choose depending on cost, others depending on speed, and others depending on mobility.
According to OECD, the major factor (on a national level) for penetration regarding broadband is actually cost, and not speed.
As Malcolm pointed out, in South Korea they still have HFC networks, they are not destroying their HFC networks when fiber is being rolled out, or just to make FTTH (or in South Koreas case its FTTB) work
“According to OECD, the major factor (on a national level) for penetration regarding broadband is actually cost, and not speed.”
Really?
How come you fail to realize that ‘broadband’ itself is a description of speed?
…
The OECD statistics show that, on a national level, people are much more sensitive to cost then speed.
You should stop debating semantics, that will get us nowhere
“According to OECD, the major factor (on a national level) for penetration regarding broadband is actually cost, and not speed”
You should link the report that says this so we can read it directly. I don’t think many will just take your word for the interpretation…
So you’re saying the NBN costs less than HFC which costs less than CAN? In terms of price.
Glad to see you think so…despite it being wrong.
DETEEGO = MALCOLM+ABBOTT?
I would rather be Abbot + Malcolm then Conjob + Jool-liar.
Be careful when picking your poison, mine is a lot less deadly ;)
Don’t bite the hand that feeds you… :)
MW please don’t be too harsh on our friend [sic] deteego. He’s at least giving it a shot, is slyly industrious and not a burden on society…
Profile: he is studying programming at the UNSW, probably in his 3rd year, believes (although he only knows 1/1000th of the knowledge required) that he already knows everything, play lots of online games and is simply trying to make a name for himself whilst working part time at TPG (formerly with PIPE) and of course, at daddy’s campaign headquarters, making coffee and probably being a fluffer, for both Mal and Tony, when they visit…!
There…
Let me assure you, if I only knew 0.00001% of the knowledge required I wouldn’t be at uni, let alone past first year
Also I have nothing to do with TPG, or PIPE. You seem to be making some absurd assumption that just because I make a case that involves a companies (or companies) that I work there or that I have some vested interest there
In fact, considering where I work (which has nothing to do with TPG, PIPE or exetel), I should have a vested interest for the NBN, not against it.
However I am not bribed so easily ;)
Oh btw, may I ask, what do you do RS. Where do you work, hmmm?
@ deteego, I have said many times that I am not involved in IT or comms (or politics) even remotely.
FUD busting – is just a hobby…LOL!
Perhaps instead of FUD and BS you should take note to what others actually write, as I do!
As such, the verdict –
Ok you only denied one part the TPG/PIPE part, so…
You are at UNSW (probably in 3rd year)
You do ergo, think you know everything…
You do volunteer work in the old mans Lib campaign office
And most importantly you make coffee and are indeed a fluffer for Mal and Tony…
There!
I’m asking where do you work and/or what educational institute do you go to
Its a direct question, it has a direct answer
You (ladies) first, or did I get it right…?
At some point in our lifetimes, the Australian Dictionary is going to have “Turnbull” as a synonym for “facepalm”…
I am shaking my Head..
Does he know what he has just stated?
“you’ve got choice” ….. They have both HFC and FTTP ..”some fibre, some HFC cable – so there’s a degree of tension and competition”
We dont have that, nor will we if Turnbull scraps the NBN..
And our HFC is not open access.. ie no competition.. I dont know whether to laugh or Cry..
Thank you for stating the obvious Mr Turnbull. What exactly does South Korea’s healthy broadband market tell you about what needs to be done in Australia?
Well, not much, because the healthy broadband market in South Korea was brought up by over a decade of government investment in the area wasn’t it?
Yeah, maintaining two networks is always cheaper than maintaining one.
Personally, I like the idea of having two road networks.
Put some of these lazy council workers in competition with eachother!
That’ll fix the potholes!
Malcolm is in a difficult position and I sympathise.
He has a mandate to pull any percievable thread to try and unravel the NBN.
But he’s starting to look foolish.
The thing in Korea, and I’m sure Mr Turnbull could not have failed to notice, is that everybody – and I really do mean everybody – live in high-rise apartment buildings. Korea has almost twice the population of Australia, living in an area about the size of Tasmania. This is a very common scene in Korean towns:
http://images.travelpod.com/users/mchavez/asian_adventure.1194635580.these-apartments-sell-like-hot-bagelsxwe-hear.jpg
So whether or not it’s feasible for Korea to run two cables into each building has very little parallel with Australia where many people living in free-standing houses and not apartments. Maybe in the CBD, but even places like inner Sydney (think the Eastern Suburbs, inner West, even just path North Sydney) it just wouldn’t be economical to run more than one cable.
We also has 1/200th their population density. In areas of Australia with high densities Optus or Telstra have already cherry picked them as there is a decent financial return. Still, there was not the financial case even in many of the more densely populated parts of country, for both Telstra and Optus to install fibre in the same street. If this is the case, how is the free market and competition ever going to provide suitably fast internet to cater for the increasing world wide data usage trend for all Australians in a timely fashion?
Anyone?
NightKhaos, Actually the Korean network was mainly NOT Government funded (check into this for yourself if you like)…. One think I strongly disagree with the current NBN plan is to roll it out to the 93%, also the vast majority (best return on investment and fastest uptake) of people will be in the main cities in Australia NOT regional communities. To me this is just a total waste of money and very poor planning/return on investment, if you can roll it out in cities first get a huge uptake and start getting money in to pay off the load as quick as possible why not do that instead of incurring interest on your debts?
A dual solution with at least both wireless and Fibre has to be the only answer perhaps keeping cable as well is a good idea (as in the case of Korea they have all three as well!)
Actually the Korean network was mainly NOT Government funded
Government Investment is not equal to Government Funded. I specifically said Investment.
One think I strongly disagree with the current NBN plan is to roll it out to the 93%, also the vast majority (best return on investment and fastest uptake) of people will be in the main cities in Australia NOT regional communities. To me this is just a total waste of money and very poor planning/return on investment, if you can roll it out in cities first get a huge uptake and start getting money in to pay off the load as quick as possible why not do that instead of incurring interest on your debts?
The reason the NBN is done like this is to prevent the kind of situation you just described. By rolling out the network to only profitable areas you leave regional areas with inadequate access and they have to “wait” for the entity, be it the government or the company, to decide that they have recovered encourage capital on the initial rollout to justify further investment in less profitable areas. The market has shown that this “wait” is indefinite.
A dual solution with at least both wireless and Fibre has to be the only answer perhaps keeping cable as well is a good idea (as in the case of Korea they have all three as well!)
The NBN in a nutshell.
Actually the Korean network was mainly NOT Government funded
That’s actually not really true, depending on what you define “mainly” as. For example, in the late 90’s the South Korean government spent $24 billion building their fibre backbone and networks. Obviously that would be much more in today’s money.
Now it’s true that a lot of the last-mile was build by industry, but looking at the picture I posted above of a typical Korean skyline, you can see why it was possible for them to work like that. Australia just doesn’t have that kind of population density, even in the CBDs (and certainly not once you get into the inner suburbs).
(Source for my $24b figure: http://news.cnet.com/South-Korea-leads-the-way/2009-1034_3-5261393.html)
South Korea has spent US $70 billion to date delivering its 100 Mbps fibre, according to Paul Budde.
It is now seeding commercial upgrades of switches to gigabit speeds with a further $1 billion.
Malcolm Turnbull appears to have stopped waving around the bank-funded study of the Economist Intelligence Unit which equated Korea’s billion-dollar upgrade with Australia’s replacement of the entire copper network with fibre, wireless and satellite.
If this is the best complaint Turnbull he can come up with after his junket, the NBN’s eventual rollout of fibre into HFC areas (probably around 2019-21) is not threatened in the least. In the meantime it is unsurprising that fibre-to-copper owners are maintaining their infrastructure to maximise its revenue over the next five or so years.
Did Turnbull also find any support for his wireless-without-fibre-is-good-enough dream? no, I thought not.
I know what we should do, move everyone to Tasmania then we can do what they’ve done in Korea ^_^
No, best solution is take down the names and a unique identifier – (say, a tax file number, or medicare number?) – and have all of these people banned by law from ever having an NBN connection, of any kind.
If they are so against it, they won’t mind being banned from using it.
Yes Michael,
I second your idea.
If you are so against it, stick up your hand and opt out “for life”.
Dialup for Malcolm I say.
After all Malcolm’s WIRELESS, WIRELESS rhetoric he comes back and says….this?
ROFL!
@MichealWyres
Well take it a step further MW, to be fair those people should also get a massive tax deduction also eh?
Given that the NBN is being funded by debt, then no, they wouldn’t get a tax break.
What debt?
You should get out more, alain. :-)
The NBN construction is being entirely funded by borrowings. It is not being funded by reallocation from budget expenditure areas, which primarily spend tax revenue.
As NBNCo goes cashflow-positive in a few years it will begin repaying the debt. In my view it will not need to be sold off, because its revenue forecasts are so ridiculously far below the historical growth trend of data consumption.
Once the borrowed construction debt is repaid some time in the 2020s, all future wholesale revenue, by then probably as big as national income tax, will be a permanent revenue stream for the public purse.
Pg 48 of the Corporate Plan…
Debt markets will provide circa 33% of funding to the end of FY2021.
That’s talking about the latter part of the construction funded by a cashflow-positive NBNCo borrowing directly. The initial years are 100% government-funded from borrowings by government.
@ Francis..
That was just a small sample for our friend alain, and in no way meant to undermine you…
There’s also more for alain to read on pg 142
Oh I see, the intended debt that has not happened yet but MAY in the future at some unknown point in time from unknown investors who MAY decide that it’s worth investing in, then again they make think wireless or gold futures is a safer bet.
In the meantime the taxpayer is funding the existing rollout and the NBN Co.
Think of it this way alain…
Instead of budgeting an amount of cash to come out of our pockets, we are issuing a credit card to NBNCo, and they are making the payments…
Well according to you previously Mr alain/advocate Contradiction – “you betcha the NBN will be a success, that’s how a monopoly works”!
So investors should be flocking to invest…according to you!
But apparently that rationale of your’s is dependent upon the argument (FUD) at any given time and at this particular time (shhh forget that), the NBN is apparently again going to be a failure which can’t be given away…sigh!
Please stop contradicting yourself. Oh of course it’s Friday…!
“People in an apartment building will typically have a range of broadband providers – some fibre, some HFC cable – so there’s a degree of tension and competition.”
So, where is the fibre and HFC in my house? I had a look and I cant find any the only thing here is a phone socket which I believe is attached to copper. Where is the tension and competition? oh that’s right if you had it your way it would only be in the capital cities, seriously shut up Turnbull we’ve had enough of your and Abbott’s idiocy for one year.
You have to remember the prime reason why Australia won’t have a HFC network AND a NBN network is that the NBN needs to be be artificially propped up with customers so it at least looks successful.
The best way to prop up a network is to buy in the customer base,by far the two biggest retail customers bases are BigPond and Optus, the rest are just blips, the NBN without those two on-board is going nowhere fast.
Telstra and Optus are not going to do it voluntarily hence a’little’ incentive payment to help with there co-operation, both SingTel and Telstra can plough that back into something that makes a decenct ROI for their shareholders, hmm let me think 4G wireless and beyond perhaps? – thank you taxpayers.
If the NBN cannot compete with the HFC on technical merit alone and a vastly taxpayer subsidised fee of entry there is something wrong.
Oh there IS something wrong!
One again, I will remind you: there has been no deal as yet struck between Optus and NBN Co.
If you think Optus are going to watch Telstra being given billions for their HFC customers and they say to the NBNCo “It’s ok you can have our customers free” – you are dreaming.
Does not change the fact that no deal has been struck, nor does it change the fact the premise of the Telstra deal is to reuse their existing ducts.
Optus whinging does not mean Optus will get a deal. They’re a big company, not a toddler the government has to prevent from having a tantrum by waving toys in front of them.
Come on get real, Optus will want a similar deal to Telstra for shutting down its HFC network and handing over its customers.
Not one customer will be migrated until it is all done and dusted.
No. It doesn’t work that way. You can’t just ignore reality. There is not even a discussion going on between NBN Co and Optus. When it was suggested it was denied by both parties. I proved this earlier. HFC can compete with the NBN, but it will ultimately not be a threat to the NBN both due to it’s limited footprint and technical limitations. This was explored previous for you eariler as well.
Your argument that the HFC needs to be brought out for the NBN has be debunked. I go for the deals part everytime because it is the easiest vector to take on this argument. It invalidates your premise that the NBN can’t handle fixed line competition.
Stop repeating the same lines. If the NBN was as bad as you seem to think a new argument against it shouldn’t be to hard to formulate! You have said it twice in as many threads in as many days, and not much else.
Actually, there are talks ongoing between Optus and NBN Co. O’Sullivan just wants to make an issue out of the Telstra deal.
He keeps demanding details of the negotiations between Telstra and NBN Co, yet refuses similar demands for details of the negotiations between Optus and NBN Co.
However, to suggest that Optus would be giving up its HFC customers to NBN Co for nothing is a load of bullshit for a couple of reasons.
1 – if they did give them up for nothing, who would they be giving them up to? NBN Co won’t be offering retail services, so NBN Co won’t be taking over those customers. Optus would simply be migrating their customers from the HFC cable to the NBN cable. They’ll still be making money off those exact same customers.
2 – Even if the customers all magically went to a different ISP, and Optus received no compensation for it, it’s still a financial win for Optus – they wouldn’t have to spend money operating and maintaining their HFC network. Fairly simple really.
The deal between Telstra and NBN Co is for access to pits/ducts/pipe. It also provides for the movement of Telstra’s customers onto the NBN. But as with Optus above, those customers will STILL be Telstra customers.
The wholesale backend changes – not the retail side. NBN Co – (from Quigley’s mouth) – have ZERO interest in offering retail services.
Actually, there are talks ongoing between Optus and NBN Co. O’Sullivan just wants to make an issue out of the Telstra deal.
Probably because Telstra is receiving $11 billion dollars, and the deal isn’t even going under scrutiny from the ACCC
Optus has every right to ask for that transparency
Whilst denying access to their own negotiations…yup, REALLY transparent…
Wow, are you like, acting like a kid or something?
The deal with Telstra is not just HFC, its transferring their whole customer base + access to ducts (among other things). The NBN, just to work, relies on the Telstra deal to come through, and there are numerous concerns regarding the “special” deal that Telstra is getting with wholesale, because of the high stake that NBN has in regards to bribing Telstra
That is completely different to NBNCo giving money to Optus to shut down its HFC. The formers case for transparency is almost paramount, the latter’s isn’t.
Telstra’s existing customers will still be Telstra customers. Optus’ existing customers will still be Optus customers. Anyone else with a wholesale network – (eg: TPG/Soul, iiNet, Internode, Nexstep, etc, etc) – will not lose their customers.
They’ll just be on a different wholesale network. Instead of Telstra in the last mile, they’ll be NBN in the last mile. In terms of backhaul, NBN will be taking over assets, not just from Telstra, but from other providers of backhaul. It will not cost them “nothing” to do so. Use your brains a little.
Your problem is you don’t give a shit about the facts. You make shit up to suit your arguments, and it makes you look like a fool, because everyone else reading these threads knows you’re wrong about.
The NBN, just to work, relies on the Telstra deal to come through
That’s not what the business case says. The business case says they can still do it even without the deal with Telstra.
If you choose to ignore the business case, or think it’s full of lies or whatever, then that’s up to you. But statements like the above need to come with a huge “in my opinion” disclaimer.
Then you must be reading a different buisness case, because if the Telstra deal falls through, then the NBN’s viability is an incredible risk, to the point where it would have to be changed to something thats not NBN
The NBN cannot compete against CAN or HFC for cost, thats why the government is shutting it down
Your problem is you don’t give a shit about the facts. You make shit up to suit your arguments, and it makes you look like a fool, because everyone else reading these threads knows you’re wrong about.
Your problem is that you create strawman and argue against points that I never stated, and any “facts” that you state are completely incorrect (apart from the one thing that you happen to know about, which is VOIP).
Telstra has the largest market share of internet users, it is getting benefits from NBNCo that no other company that gets transferred over to NBN (Optus or otherwise) is not getting, thats the reason why everyone wants to deal to get scrutinized by the ACCC.
Optus is not receiving any special treatment, Telstra is
Then you must be reading a different buisness case
I’m reading the one released by NBNCo. Not sure which one you’re reading, but the one released by NBNCo says that the NBN is still viable and still possible without the deal, even though it may cause rollout delays and increased risk.
Again, if you want to conflate “increased risk” with “the NBN, just to work, relies on the Telstra deal to come through” then it’s up to you, but you need to prefix what you’re saying with “I believe, contrary to what NBNCo’s business plan states,” otherwise you’re just trying to mislead people. If you want to say there is increased risk in the project if the deal falls through, then fine. If you want to say significant risk, then that’s fine, too. But the idea that the project is impossible without the deal is simply not what the Business Case says.
Agree with HFC just not being a viable competitor. Speak to Optus customers in for example Cranbourne which has has not been upgraded. When loading is low it is fine, the kids come home from school or are on holidays and dial up is better, in fact it can take multiple attempts to even log on and get service, this is the issue with shared spectrum. The NBN will have aggregation factors but that will be backbone and is easily addressed as required. This as customer needs grow with the oft mentioned looming data tsunami will share the same issue, premium services will through QOS be able to obtain a guaranteed minimum service, the rest who pay for the service and are the financial bread and butter will lump what is left
Oh Mr. alain Contradiction… are you speaking of (and inferring) the HFC network which you previously told us was/is a complete failure should be left operational now?
In fact you said you have a HFC cable across the road from you, hanging off poles and stated the only positive use for it, “is for the pigeons to perch from….”!
Oh but that was a different thread where the reverse analogy was required to spin your baseless FUD, eh…?
For God’s sake, stop contradicting your self, please!
HFC is upgradeable to a-lot faster then 100mbits if the fibre backbone could handle it it could go higher then 400mbits. Talk is we could get 600mbit out of Telstra/Bigponds if they had a few billion $ spare for upgrades.
Optus’s HFC is horrible in places all you have to to is like google Optus cable problems and you get a list as long as a HFC network. Optus never put money into their network so its only a matter of time before theirs goes fail unless they put a heap of money in.
Problem is though with both HFC’s they aren’t everywhere. My street has both Optus and Telstra HFC.
Go 3 streets away and Optus’s is gone. 5mins by car and there is no HFC at all.
The cable quality and short line distance mean that it is hypercritically possible to get higher information rates than we do currently, but the majority of the bandwidth on HFC cable will be utilised for the primary function, Television.
Since the NBN network structure is a open conduit, able to provide basicly whatever anyone wants up it’s capacity, it is a far more open and flexiable design. To get the same flexibility with HFC will take considerable investment, not to mention that the maximum bandwidth deliverable will also come short compared Fibre solutions.
This isn’t to say HFC could be used as an intermediate step, but it’s upgrade path is limited.
*hypothetically Spell check fail. :(
Is it any surprise that Turnbull has gone on the ultimate cherry picking tour? His aim of course was to track down any bit of information whatsoever which could be used as ammunition against the NBN. In reality if Stephen Conroy went to exactly the same places, I’m sure he would come back having cherry picked different stories that support his implementation of the NBN.
When it comes to comparisons with other countries I find it all immensely irrelevant. We are a very unique country with sparsely populated rural areas and densely populated coastal capital cities. Obviously a network to service all Australians with ubiquitous fast broadband was always going to take a visionary bold and expensive type of network, unlike any other in the world.
HFC is great for current customers, but it’s a dying technology and will serve no purpose in the future, once the NBN is rolled out. To maintain it under the guide of increased competition is nonsense.
Correct, Simon, but regional Australia is also extremely urbanised, which is why fibre to dense country towns is also cheaper than erecting and operating enough wireless towers to deliver 12 Mbps unshared bandwidth to every premises in the town.
The Australian fibre footprint has a population density of over 200 persons per square km, not much different in country towns than outer suburbia of the capital cities, and incidentally quite similar to our Asian neighbours who have had fibre to premises for up to a decade. As an easy example of this, look at a map of Willunga SA.
@SimonReidy
“if Stephen Conroy went to exactly the same places, I’m sure he would come back having cherry picked different stories that support his implementation of the NBN.”
Turnbull just came back and said other communication infrastructures including HFC were in use in Sth Korea, that’s just fact, not cherry picking.
It’s nothing new, we knew that before today’s article in here.
“HFC is great for current customers,”
It’s also great for customers who can get it but don’t want it either, valid comparisons can be made with the FTTH rollout on that one, but let’s not go there.
, “but it’s a dying technology and will serve no purpose in the future, once the NBN is rolled out.”
Doesn’t seem to stop Telstra and Optus upgrading it at their own expense for even higher speeds in select areas though, you are right, it will serve no purpose once Telstra and Optus have been given big $$$ to shut it down.
That’s NBN FTTH winning customers on its ‘-cough-cough -‘ technical merits!
Of course it’s cherry-picking. Cherry-picking means you choose bits of information (yes, “facts”) that support your argument, and ignore others.
For example, he’s ignoring the fact that the South Korean government spent around $24b in the late nineties (a bit over $30b in today’s money) building out their broadband infrastructure. Concentrating only on the fact that private industry has largely built the “last mile” of the network. In Australia’s case, we’re raising $27b of government debt to build the whole thing – backbone, infrastructure and last mile!
@Dean
“In Australia’s case, we’re raising $27b of government debt to build the whole thing – backbone, infrastructure and last mile!”
Err no, you need to read the NBN business plan, it’s over $43 billion, and just using the term ‘debt’ doesn’t magically make it all ok.
The debt has to be repaid WITH INTEREST! remember, and who is indemnifying that debt and repaying it? – the taxpayer.
“The debt has to be repaid WITH INTEREST! remember, and who is indemnifying that debt and repaying it? – the taxpayer.”
OK, if this is true then the government must be raising a new tax OR diverting tax funds from somewhere else to repay NBNco’s debt. So, can you show us where in the federal budget this is happening?
NBN kills building networks by anyone but them. It means we will never have a decent upgrade or a new connections unless NBN is ordered to. No competition means higher prices without any chance of lowering them.
What are you all talking about???
Yes, we need a better network but government is not qualified to build and run it.
“Yes, we need a better network but government is not qualified to build and run it.”
Oh dear, this tired old argument. The NBN is infrastructure, when did people get the idea that governments shouldn’t build infrastructure?
Just for giggles, care to remind us who built the existing copper network?
Yes, I see how government created Telecom and then Telstra. What good did you get from there?
And now they are killing all competition.
“Yes, I see how government created Telecom and then Telstra.”
Actually it started with PMG, but at least you admit the government is qualified to build a national communications network.
“And now they are killing all competition.”
What competition would that be? Let’s count many national fixed-line networks exist today, and how many existed in the past. Oh – just one. How can you kill competition when it never existed to begin with?
“Actually it started with PMG”
You got me.
“What competition would that be? Let’s count many national fixed-line networks exist today, and how many existed in the past. Oh – just one. How can you kill competition when it never existed to begin with?”
Do we really need a “national”? At that cost? Government kills building new networks and even upgrading existed ones. Didn’t you know that?
Lucky it’s not the government building it, then, but a company set up specifically for the job and currently staffed with some of the brightest minds in telecommunications in this country!
And that company is qualified? Really?
“And that company is qualified?”
Yes.
“Really?”
Yes.
Argument getting a bit thin?
Please give me facts. Your faith looks like a religious one.
Oh MSM, you conveniently ignore the retail side or simply don’t comprehend and are swallowing the BS being fed you…
At the moment when we sign up for a plan with an ISP we deal with their retail side (even if Telstra). We don’t deal with the wholesale/network owners directly. So in essence nothing changes there with the NBN, as we will deal with RSPs, not NBNCo.
Regardless, currently apart from a few HFC networks in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, Telstra have the last mile monopoly. As such, many people throughout Australia can only buy Telstra services from Telstra (no, not because Telstra are great guys who have invested – because they inherited the PSTN – otherwise they wouldn’t be there either)!
Please don’t try to tell me companies placing a few DSLAMs in Telstra exchanges and using Telstra’s network is them constructing infrastructure! Also speaking of competition at network level, do you really believe that multiple companies are willing to invest $b’s in competing infrastructure? And if they did should we have multiple cables from multiple companies, in our homes? And these companies digging up our footpaths every couple of months or dangling many cables from poles? If your answer is yes, then we should also have multiple water pipes, sewerage pipes, electricity cables, all in the name of competition…
Ridiculous, these are natural monopolies!
Anyway, RSP’s/ISP’s and even comms companies, aren’t (or shouldn’t be) in the business of construction (that’s strangely enough, for construction companies). How many airports has QANTAS built, how many roads has Toll built.
The NBN makes it so by building the network, which then creates competition at retail level. By supplying a network where all RSPs are able access and offer services (if they choose) to everyone. Opening up feverish competition. I.e. RSP’s will be able to concentrate on their core business of selling comms, not building networks – “the way it should be”…IMHO!
Seriously…
It seems you don’t know that large ISPs own private networks. It’s not the last mile but NBN will kill upgrading those networks and won’t allow building new ones.
Name them?
Internode’s Wi-Max? LOL!
@RS
“Anyway, RSP’s/ISP’s and even comms companies, aren’t (or shouldn’t be) in the business of construction (that’s strangely enough, for construction companies).”
Funnily enough I mainly agree with you up to the above statement, because in that comment you conveniently overlook one of the most successful communications infrastructure builds in Australia – wireless.
Wireless has been very successful for the investors of the companies doing it, especially the company that has the biggest and highest speed network Telstra, and with LTE and beyond it intends to stay that way.
Without mobiles, and wireless data revenue and the tie up of lucrative sole seller smartphone supply contracts Telstra and SingTel in Australia might as well sell meat pie franchises.
“By supplying a network where all RSPs are able access and offer services (if they choose) to everyone. Opening up feverish competition. I.e. RSP’s will be able to concentrate on their core business of selling comms, not building networks – “the way it should be”…”
I don’t think Telstra and Optus and others are going to stop rolling out and upgrading wireless infrastructure just because they can flog retail NBN!, increasingly if you care to read their Financial Reports their core business is building and upgrading networks to support their lucrative cash cow – wireless revenue.
The so called ‘feverish competition’ post NBN you are hoping for is going to be even less than it is today, at least today ISP’s like iiNet, Internode, TPG etc can at least differentiate their fixed line BB product range because they have some control over their bottom line because they own DSLAM exchange gear.
ISP’s can also buy ULL access from third party DSLAM vendors like Optus and iiNet and sell a very popular BB product called Naked DSL, who needs to pay Telstra a separate line rental charge any more.
Remember Naked DSL is not a product that the biggest ISP BigPond even sells, so those ISP’s that do sell it have a competitive edge, and let’s face it competing against the BIgPond marketing weight of the ‘package’ they need all the ‘edge’ they can get!.
With the NBN every ISP is like every other ISP, selling the same identical vanilla flavoured plans that the NBN Co allows them to sell.
Feverish competition? – hmm I doubt it.
Oh alain, I see you have found a new NBN FUD topic (since all your other have embarrassed you) wireless…LOL, where (at least for now) you haven’t had to contradict your self yet…
But it is only early I suppose.
I you have you ever needed (as I did with a hospitalisation to a family member a few weeks back) to ever rely upon wireless (you have cable at least available eh – no wonder you don’t want the rest of the country to be able to have comms better than you) you will know what a frustrating technology it is (in practical terms) and AGAIN only good as a sideline to fixed…!
That makes no sense at all, beats addressing any of my points I guess, when in doubt (which is often) head off into a off-topic irrelevant rant.
You have been told countless times by those more tech savvy than I about wireless’ downfall, but like everything else you are told, with complete factual basis, if it doesn’t fit within your own little make believe employer/wallet/Lib party sponsored BS, you will not listen.
Wireless is NOT a serious alternative IMO. it is complimentary.
I note with interest that you DID NOT admit to using all wireless, so you have fixed yourself…
Makes your entire argument most hypocritical then, doesn’t it?
Once again, neither of Conroy or Turnbull are addressing the Gang of Four even though the continued existence of this government-created cartel is stunting the domestic transit and content market.
When will either of these idiots address existing issues in their portfolios?
Personally, I get a laugh out of – “well, Korea kept their HFC, ner ner ner ner nerrrrr”.
Who the hell says Korea got it right?
It’s like the “the yanks are going wireless direction, so that’s the right way to go”.
Because the Yanks never get anything wrong, right?
Pfft.
We may or may not be going the right way, but the “well, this is what someone else did” argument is hogwash, and FUD-creational.
“We may or may not be going the right way, but the “well, this is what someone else did” argument is hogwash, and FUD-creational.”
Indeed, so when Conroy who has used overseas examples like South Korea (although the back pedal is being used on that one today) in the past as examples of how Australia will be left behind in the digital age, we can dismiss that also as ‘hogwash, and FUD-creational’ ?
“being left behind by” is totally different to “we should do it exactly the same way as”
You are completely missing the point. If you are going to compare Australia to Korea (or Japan) you can’t just selectively ignore the points which dispute the argument (which is what Conroy has done) and only consider ones that support your argument.
He says we are behind Korea, so we have to have broadband like them (a comparison) but then he says that we shouldn’t be compared to Korea in regards to the costs of the project (a comparison he is ignoring)
Even earlier then that he said we can be compared to Korea because even though Australia is massive, 90% of Australians live in 0.1% of our land mass, but then even in that 0.1% of land mass South Korea still has on average 4 times population density then Australia
Of course, all these points conclude the obvious, South Korea and Japan did their FTTH because it was commercially viable due to population density, not necessarily because it was some massive benefit to the country
If Conroy is not allowed to do it, neither is Turnbull.
It’s politics, not technical merit they are arguing.
I don’t see Turnbull anywhere ignoring that Korea has high FTTP (or FTTB) penetration, in fact he is acknowledging it
*facepalm*
That’s not even what is being discussed.
Everyone knows Conroy is a dick.
Conroy did not think of the NBN, as much as he claims it as his own.
Australia – no matter how you measure it – does not correlate with South Korea.
Turnbull is wrong to do it. Conroy is wrong to do it.
That doesn’t mean the NBN is “wrong”.
Enough talk of dicks, or I’ll have this site added to a certain ACMA list!
Conroy did not think of the NBN, as much as he claims it as his own.
So who did, the boogey man?
Telstra ironically. Back in the Howard era, when the then Department of Communications requested a report into options for broadband infrastructure upgrades.
Try to keep up.
That was fibre to the node, which Sth Korea has also but we are not allowed to mention that anymore. lol
It was actually FTTN, FTTH, and a combination of the two. Three options were presented.
Do try and keep up.
Oh I’m keeping up, I just making sure the full facts are presented, sometimes the all important total picture tends to not quite make it in your agenda driven comments.
*rolls around on the floor laughing*
That’s funny. You? Presenting facts?
*rolls around on the floor laughing some more*
So you are telling me that Telstra proposed a 93% FTTH scheme created as a government monopoly
Wow, you are so lying through your teeth its not funny
Im sorry, the government (aka Labor) came up with the 93% FTTH scheme, in fact Conroy came up with the scheme on the back of the envelope when he had to reach Rudd on a plane because there wasn’t any way to contract Rudd at the time
You’re a dick of the highest order.
Telstra was commissioned to develop a list of recommendations of how what might be done, and how much it might cost.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Stop twisting people’s words, tool.
And those recommendations equated to a 93% FTTH?
Come on, please, show me some documents from Telstra that recommended a 90-93% FTTH build (by either the government, or Telstra, or a combination of both).
Otherwise, Telstra never ever recommended or even thought of building anything like the NBN (otherwise we would have an announcement)
You said
Conroy did not think of the NBN, as much as he claims it as his own.
Then I asked
So who did, the boogey man?
Then you replied
Telstra ironically. Back in the Howard era, when the then Department of Communications requested a report into options for broadband infrastructure upgrades.
That equates to an NBN how?
Of course then you backtracked, to cover your lies, and said
It was actually FTTN, FTTH, and a combination of the two. Three options were presented.
Do try and keep up.
Of which, still, I see no document at all, Telstra proposing/considering/thinking of a full blown Australia FTTH, since doing so would almost take up all of Telstra’s market share in value just for capital costs (LOL!!).
In fact, the only proposal I can see from Telstra, is their plan B (when NBN fails) which is a combination FTTN/FTTH in capital cities or their tender for NBN MK1, which was FTTN to 98%. If you are saying that either of those is the current, 93% FTTH NBN, then you sir are deluded
@Deteego
I too would like to see the so called Telstra report that was given to the Howard Government outlining a combination of FTTN and FTTH, and what the percentage ratios were.
I thought Telstra was planning to upgrade the vast majority of its copper to FTTN because they reasoned quit rightly that FTTH was too expensive for the ROI they would get, especially when handing it over to competitors under ACCC jurisdiction.
Both Telstra and the Optus led G9 consortium in their respective Fibre to the Node bids wanted changes to ACCC laws ,especially pertaining to ROI before they were prepared to build, but it never got that far.
It’s news to me that Telstra or G9 were even remotely interested in FTTH.
So Micheal Wyres what report is that?
You’re absolutely right…(for once)…Telstra weren’t interested in building FTTH. It was/is too expensive for a commercial entity seeking commercial return in a commercial timeframe.
FTTN on the other hand, the government has developed a plan to pay for it.
Of course, you already know all that. Forgive me if you’ve heard all this before, but since you’ve asked basically the same question 43 billion times, I’m sure it’s familiar to you.
As for the actual report, go ask Conroy to release it…stump up for the FOI fee, and see it for yourself.
“FTTN on the other hand, the government has developed a plan to pay for it.”
The plan to pay for it is easy you you keep sucking taxpayer funds, what about the plan where it pays for itself?- that’s assuming 70% uptake in the vague timeline.
70% uptake? dreaming.
“As for the actual report, go ask Conroy to release it…stump up for the FOI fee, and see it for yourself.”
Oh so you haven’t read it either then, best let that one go through to the keeper eh MW?
@ alain…
You are “making it up”… not keeping up.
Beats responding in a rational manner I guess.
You’d know :)
Holy crap guys, I leave you alone for one day and go out to meetings, and a 70-comment thread appears? Maybe I should leave more often! I missed out on all the fun!
A friend in Korea told me there is no competition as such, areas with HFC won’t have FTTH, and areas with FTTH won’t have HFC. Similar to our green fields estates.
Wether this is true or not, I don’t know, but some quick googling seems to confirm it.
Given Labor’s poor poll ratings, come the next election, the NBN (or what little of it will actually exist) will be dead & buried. Far better to spend the $50+ billion on hospitals, schools & transport.
If the election was next week, you’d have a point, but it’s not. It’s 2 1/2 years away…
Well if the next 2 1/2 years is any indication of what Labor has been doing up until now, thats definitely not a good sign
@Comrade $50B+?
I love the way a few different??? named posters use $50b..!
Anyway… ,or better still do like the Coalition did last time in power – spend SFA and say, wow look at what great fiscal managers we are.
Hospitals – like the $600bn that will be invested from the federal government, not including state funding which is significant – suchas the $2bn Fiona Stanley hospital in Perth. Nevermind the fact hospitals are supposed to be STATE FUNDED.
Schools – like the BER? What about the $500bn (off the top of my head) that will be invested from the federal government, not including the state funding, considering schools are supposed to be STATE FUNDED.
Transport – like the $120bn that will be invested from the federal government, not including state funding, considering transportation is supposed to be STATE FUNDED.
We already have some of the best hospitals, schools and roads in the developed world – but nope, we need to continue upgrading them – because having some of the worst broadband in the world is A-OK! Our cities are the most isolated from each other in the world, good communications is absolutely necessary – we are one of the richest countries in the world, why the hell do people have this either or attitude? We are not a poor country. We can do it all, and do it all without cutting corners.
Labor might spend like a drunken sailor, but our economy can sustain it – I sincerely hope Abbot does not win, as we will see nothing other than spending cuts and penny pinching.
I haven’t even touched the fact the NBN will cost us a grand total of $0 if the business case stacks up and it repays itself.
But hey, don’t let the facts get in the way of a good argument right?
“I haven’t even touched the fact the NBN will cost us a grand total of $0 if the business case stacks up and it repays itself.”
There are two enormous IF’S in that statement.
“But hey, don’t let the facts get in the way of a good argument right?”
True, but you didn’t present any facts only rose coloured glasses crystal ball gazing, so nothing got in the way.
Facts…LOL again alain!
You naysayers denigrated the NBN because there wasn’t a Business/Corporate Plan.But now that you have your wish, you say the Corporate plan isn’t factual – big “IF’s”!
Sure assumptions are made – ummm they have to assume, as it isn’t built yet…LOL!
But the facts are as the Corporate Plan suggests, NOT as you suggest. These are documented facts as best as any unfinished project can have.
Yours is nothing more than a bitter, selfish naysayers hopes and prayers for failure…!
So please stop both making it up as you go and particularly stop the contradictions…!
“These are documented facts as best as any unfinished project can have.”
Oh so they are not facts they are predictions then, thanks for the clarification – now where is my roulette wheel?
“Oh so they are not facts they are predictions then, thanks for the clarification – now where is my roulette wheel?”
Probably left it where you were spinning your last argument.
@rawly
Priceless…LOL!!!
@alain, you sounded just like a KID. Don’t you know how business works? If everyone only do business with 100% guaranteed and 0% risk, everyone would be rich by now.
Please stop being childish or stop commenting.
Hey Kiddo why don’t you (and others) discuss the facts that you dispute with me instead the childish name calling.
Cheap shots is just lazy, anyone can do that and they do, if you have nothing to add to the discussion – why bother?
alain, stop being a hypocritical troll and a defensive one at that…
That coming from you of all posters is absolutely priceless.
Well I’m glad my honesty is as priceless to you as your laughable FUDulent comments, are to the rest of us…alain!
Ok, tell us how else they can do it…? Give us the definites, of a project which won’t be completed for the best part of a decade…go on!
It’s all good and well to sit here and take pot shots, but to deny common sense (EVERY CONSTRUCTION JOB EVERYWHERE IS ESTIMATED…sigh), you really are showing your complete desperation…!
To bag figures which you are unable to disprove, is actually pretty funny, in a desperate way…!
Seems you have been reduced to status of meaningless troll whose only avenue left for FUD spinning, is to attack analysed assumptions contained within the Corporate Plan (yes the same one you initially demanded and ridiculed NBN for not having…OMG) with your own unanalysed, baseless BS..!
But thank you for at least not contradicting your self this time…LOL!!!!
They can sell the NBN message better. Lets face it if the NBN dies this next election, it wont get spoken about for a long period of time, definitely not at level of vision whilst the Libs are in.
Its not IT gurus and business Labor needs to get the message through, its the average household that is probably quite happy with their currently level of connectivity. There is no message out there for these people beyond intangible and currently unknownable benefits. Fear of the NBN will thrive in the absence of useful information to the customer and taxpayer.
Something that would make me happier is a plan B in case the NBN doesn’t not reach the figures it predicts based on its assumption.
eg: if take up is only 60% what would be the net effect to the taxpaper. Will the customer or taxpayer be expected to pay higher cost?
It would also be good if they could work with RSPs to determine rough price brackets that the customer would be expected to pay for services once the NBN is fully under way. After all, they are building it for us consumers ,we should have some sort of idea what the running costs are going to be.
Agree 100%…
I have said previously, the Libs are vastly superior at “the political game”.
Labor has had lots of positive NBN news, analysis etc, but are unable to get the word out. Where as Carlos Slim Helu arrives here says a few NBN negative words and the Lib PR machine goes to work and within the hour it is on every media outlet everywhere…
Plan B also sounds like a reasonable enough umm, plan B…LOL. Problem being though, why would it be anymore credible to the naysayers than plan A? Who claim the Corporate Plan is “toilet paper” anyway?
Here’s Internode’s price list from Tassie as a guide…
http://www.internode.on.net/residential/fibre_to_the_home/nbn_plans/
Those prices are nice if they would in fact be the final expected price. From what I read the Tassie prices are not a true reflection of natural market forces, more FUD?
I guess where I am coming from in regards to the NBN Message is that there really is no direct message from Labor itself. I haven’t received anything in the mail, haven’t seen the local member campaigning about it. It’s lazy and unforgivable as there will not be many opportunities to push this barrow.
Its has just been left to the media to promulgate the message over here. In WA the only newspaper choices are The West Australian and the Australian, guess what message they sell….
Lol, still playing catch up Jackey J?
The Internode price list is actual, it exists, it is not FUD… there are also price guidelines contained within the Corporate Plan… Seems you are showing your true colours more and more…or just being pedantic for **ts and giggles!
This is factual information, unlike alain’s laughable URL, pointing to comments by a “Liberal party Senator”… LOL! Fancy a Lib Senators whose party vehemently opposes the NBN, bagging the NBN!
Right on cue, re: the media available in WA and the URL supplied by alain, exactly my point re: Libs (superior imo) PR machine and their close associations with those able to spread their word…!
Good news for WA Jackey J…
http://delimiter.com.au/2011/03/11/perth-to-geraldton-nbn-backbone-lights-up/
Kudos to NBNCo and great great news for Geraldton, but why is there a roll out of DSL services?
Geraldton isn’t a small city (approx 30k ppl) so why wouldnt the NBN try to capture the market immediately with a fibre roll out? Wouldnt it make sense for NBNCo to do deals with these ISPs to get them to lay fibre instead of installing DSLAMs, after all the ISPs want the NBN too.
People who are impressed with the new DSL speeds are not going to see a requirement for FTTH.
Good question…Jackey J?
Without knowing, one can only surmise that Geraldton probably isn’t in the immediate, actual NBN picture per se`, but this will suffice in the interim…?
“Good question…Jackey J?
Without knowing,”
You should have stopped there, while you were ahead.
Once again reduced to the roll of mindless troll… well it suits you…!
Here is another Tassie ‘price guide’
http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2011/02/24/209621_tasmania-news.html
Oh dear.
That was a political speech, not a price guide…
As such, can you please point out all of the plans available, speeds, prices etc within your URL for us all to see…?
Please, your latest desperation is embarrassing even for you, one who contradicts himself at a whim…!
Yes I though you wouldn’t like it, especially when you quote Internode pricing which reflects the current NBN Co heavily subsidised honeymoon pilot pricing phase, and not the eventual commercial wholesale pricing.
But then you know that but let’s pretend otherwise eh?
Typical side-step so AGAIN alain…
Can you please point out all of the plans available, speeds, prices etc within your URL for us all to see…?
Go on there’s a good boy…!
Digest this.
http://www.internode.on.net/news/2010/06/184.php
Especially these statements.
“Prices for Internode FTTH plans in the Tasmanian pilot will be maintained until June 30, 2011, when official NBN wholesale pricing is expected to be available.
For a limited time, Internode has further sweetened the deal by offering free fibre setup for customers in the northern Tasmanian towns of Smithton and Scottsdale and the Hobart suburb of Midway Point.”
Now go away.
Where in that article does it say that prices are going up by $24 per month? That article in The Mercury you linked to just took the current price and added $24 to come up with the $53.95 per month which has absolutely no basis in reality.
The simple fact is, until ISPs actually release their final pricing, we can’t say how much it will cost at retail. I’m happy to be proved wrong, but my prediction is that final pricing will not be all that much different to what you see now.
Fair enough call that the whole $24 may not be passed on, and we only have to wait until the start of the next financial year to find out.
With or without the $24 extra a month it is better than what I am currently paying for, (Internode lowest plan) which is the only plan I would take up at the moment. Would I stump up the money to have fibre connected to the house myself, No. But if the NBN rolls thorough my area I will be connecting at that price.
Helloooo, elaine (oops alain) the light is on, but…
Show us the prices from the Liberal Senator’s spiel you idiotically tried to pass off as a “price list”
Well go on.
Yes you’d love me to go away wouldn’t you, so, ummm…(((((NO))))))…
LOL!
I didn’t say it was a price list, you did, no response to the Internode link on NBN pricing I see – funny that eh?
@ alain. LOL here’s exactly what you said (from above) –
“Here is another Tassie ‘PRICE GUIDE’”!!!
Your exact words… go on be pedantic now and tell us you said ‘guide not list’…that would seriously be the FUD icing on your FUD cake, FUDster…!
So AGAIN elaine, please point out the various plans and prices contained within your “price guide”…LOL!
No comment (apart from but, but, but) – funny that eh?
Dear oh dear even when you bluntly say something (and it’s written above for all to see) you still refute saying it – I know you post as advocate as well, but are you also teegy too? Or is lies, FUD, BS, CONTRADICTIONS and DENIAL all part of being a fully qualified NBN FUD muppet?
Anyway… unlike you I will answer, I am not an invertebrate who skulks off, sobbing…
In case you didn’t notice the Internode “price guide” (as opposed to your price guide which you still haven’t pointed out the range of prices…LOL) is dated 8 June 2010 (when the NBN was first released, in the first release sites)! Gee revelation #1.
It is known as salesmanship… I would have thought that was bleedin’ obvious, especially to those who laud private enterprise. Like any new product, you give an introductory offer for a limited time to entice people to buy from you and sample just how good your product is (do you live under a rock?)! Especially needed when your prospective clientele are “more than likely” currently contracted to another Telco/ISP!
But eventually the interim offer closes (as this one is due to 30.06.2011 – so over a year)… wow revelation #2… BFD!
What you choose to ignore (from your own posted URL, 1st paragraph) and as you have suggested previously NBN prices will be dearer (BTW – I am just the messenger, if you wish to whinge, whine and promote FUD – as you will, please do so to Internode…LOL) –
“Internode’s aggressive entry-level fibre price is $10 less than its cheapest standalone ADSL broadband plans – the ADSL Standard or Extreme ADSL2+ plans – which each cost $39.95 a month.
Yes nice load of verbal diversion stocking filler without any substance.
Current NBN pricing is heavily subsidised pilot phase pricing, it in no way reflects the full commercial pricing – end of.
No elaine…
You asked, I answered – unlike you of the invertebrate type, who is too afraid to answer (because your lack of knowledge and ridiculous contradictions havebitten you before…LOL)!…
Just because you are not mentally equipped to accept others common sense and factual views, which conflict with your employer/wallet/political driven stupidity/FUD…
Don’t blame me…!
Ooh BTW elaine – you still avoided pointing out the prices contained within “YOUR PRICE GUIDE”… LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
End of indeed…!
“I have said previously, the Libs are vastly superior at “the political game”.
They are? – didn’t help them at the last election nor did it help them when they tried to win the support of the Independents to try and form a Government.
“Labor has had lots of positive NBN news, analysis etc, but are unable to get the word out”
… or there is not any positive news that that the word needs to get out for, depends how you look at it.
Conroy seems to spend most of his time on the defence, and not doing it very well either.
@alain. Yes the Libs are imo…
And to analyse the election, for Labor to have only months before, had the most popular PM ever, then forced into having to dump him and go within a whisker of losing the election with a new leader, demonstrates that Labor shot themselves in the foot, but “the Libs took full political advantage as they should and did”.
Imo, Abbott was voted in by his party as the sacrificial lamb, to protect Joe and Mal from annihilation by the popular Rudd. At the time I bet Labor were laughing as Abbott seemed to be the most unlikely and I think they under estimated him. Things then turned and Abbott rallied his team and with that political PR expertise almost pulled off the impossible, winning the election… and full credit must go to Abbott for doing so…(probably why he hasn’t been replaced by Joe or Mal, as he would have been and was meant to be, following any Labor landslide).
The proof that the Libs have propaganda down to a fine art and a lot of Aussies bluffed re: the NBN, is ironically you alain. You believe and will gladly lap up “and repeat at every blog” every negative NBN inference they utter!
So thank you for being my star [sic] witness…!
Next, according to you (and that one eye of your’s) there has never been any positive NBN news (keep lapping that propaganda from the Lib machine…LOL), which demonstrates your complete and utter bias and/or lack of comprehension.
Conversely, most pro NBN people understand the risks, accept the negatives, but still believe the positives greatly outweigh the negatives for the nation as a whole for future generations…
“You believe and will gladly lap up “and repeat at every blog” every negative NBN inference they utter!”
Well I don’t actually, the media like this one does it quite well thanks, they hang on every Turnbull utterance, including the ‘ pro -NBN twinkle’ in his eye! LOL
It is then followed by the usual pro-NBN rhetoric that is repeated ad nauseum, when facts and or links are requested the poster usually disappears ( the infamous forum one post wonders) or go straight into playing the man not the ball, or go off on a off topic rant as a diversionary tactic.
“Conversely, most pro NBN people understand the risks, accept the negatives, but still believe the positives greatly outweigh the negatives for the nation as a whole for future generations…”
Accept the negatives? – LOL that’s hilarious – you just ignore them and pretend they don’t exist – that’s ‘accepting’ them is it?
Yes and thank you for the boring flag waving exercise, when in doubt pull out the tired cliché about ‘nation building’.
You are right about the future generations, future taxpayers will still be paying for this expensive build it and they MIGHT come NBN white elephant for decades.
It is then followed by the usual pro-NBN rhetoric that is repeated ad nauseum, when facts and or links are requested the poster usually disappears ( the infamous forum one post wonders) or go straight into playing the man not the ball, or go off on a off topic rant as a diversionary tactic.
This coming from you of all people is absolutely priceless. Remind me again, where is the deal between NBN Co and Optus?
“This coming from you of all people is absolutely priceless. Remind me again, where is the deal between NBN Co and Optus?”
So you absolutely guarantee there will be no deal between the Government and Optus to close down their HFC network and move the client base to NBN FTTH?
.
Stop weaselling elaine.
You keep saying a deal HAS been done with Optus, when it hasn’t…
It may well happen, but it hasn’t.
So either you are 1. Mistaken. 2. Wrong. 3. Spreading lies.
Considering NightKhaos has corrected you umpteen times and you still keep saying it, I’d suggest 2 and 3…!
So are you going to guarantee that not one $ will pass between Conroy and Optus for the shutdown of their HFC and the transfer of the client base, just like Telstra is ( if approved by shareholders)?
No I didn’t think so – keep tap dancing RS.
Earth to planet FUD, come in planet FUD…elaine can you hear me?
IF YOU CAN READ (well to be fair I know you can) SO IF YOU CAN COMPREHEND…sorry for shouting but I need to at least try to penetrate the seemingly impenetrable FUD barrier…
Have a look what I said above elaine…
You keep saying a deal HAS been done with Optus, when it hasn’t…
((((It may well happen, but it hasn’t.))))
DO YOU UNDERSTAND????? Enough lies….!
So that’s a NO then I take it? LOL
Der… that is a NO, got it this time (I said it MAY happen… can you understand anything?)……or should I draw you a picture…
Nice foil to try to cover the fact that you are TYPICALLY, 100% WRONG though… because no deal has been signed as you keep saying it has, so as usual your are FOS and trying desperately to blame others for your uneducated FUD (just as teegy does…LOL)…!
So tell us, has a deal been signed between Optus and the Government/NBNCo – YES or NO?
As the answer IS no, as we all (apparently except one…sigh) already know, are you man enough to accept that you were/are WRONG. YES OR NO…!
Umm, I think this is your cue to typically disappear from this thread (or even Delimiter) for a few days and come back, with further FUD (and even saying Optus/NBNCO deal is done, again…LOL) pretending this didn’t happen…OMFG!
Final question are you ever going to stop the baseless lies…? Ooh, I certainly will take that as a NO…!
I Think that the point is that you misrepresent your assumptions as being facts. You have stated that there IS a deal while in reality no such deal yet exists.
IMO the government could do the following:
1. make it illegal to develop fixed line competitive networks (I.e. cherry picking laws).
2. Refuse RSL rights, or any form of NBN access to any company offering competitive fixed line services.
And Bingo, Optus would have to make the choice to continue the maintenance, marketing, customer service and so forth without the possibility of expanding their market share.
Optus also would not be able to access the NBN for their mobile network development, which may give further advantage to their competition.
@ alain/advocate and what ever other names you hide behind.. lies, disgraceful lies… my what desperation…!
You said “It is then followed by the usual pro-NBN rhetoric that is repeated ad nauseum, when facts and or links are requested the poster usually disappears ( the infamous forum one post wonders) or go straight into playing the man not the ball, or go off on a off topic rant as a diversionary tactic”.
Ask away, contradiction boy, I am ready are you????? You haven’t suddenly grown some have you?
But please when you ask and the proof is there for all to see AS PREVIOUSLY, no but’s but’s, like you did when I said Graeme Samuel said “he doesn’t think a CBA is possible, in relation to the NBN”…
You keep saying he didn’t say that! Even after I posted a video interview where, Graeme Samuel says exactly those words and you can see him saying them… i even gave you the exact times he says it…
But you still refute…LOL!!!!!!
Well alain, did he say it, yes or no? Let’s get the ball rolling here…! Well???
So ask away (but remember before, RFP, ADSL2, FTTN tender…LOL you all got wrong…)… come on, you talk the talk, now walk the walk… this will be fun…!
Hellooo alain… stop hiding and making snipes, stand up and be counted…!
You talk the talk but when it comes to the crunch you turn to water…
Did Graeme Samuel say that “he didn’t believe an NBN CBA was possible”… Yes or No..
Pick one (either Yes or No) I can’t make any simpler, even for you…!
LOL elaine…
Let me use your own words… “when facts and or links are requested the poster (you elaine) disappears ( the infamous forum one post wonder).
The word invertebrate keeps coming to mind…
Your feeble attempts to go off topic on subject matter that has already been responded to months ago when you are being hammered is predictable but futile.
You claim you want factual debate, so i got the ball rolling and you are stumped already…LOL
Grow some… yes or no…?
Better still let me humour you as one would a child (most apt)… dear oh dear elaine I must have missed your insightful [sic] answer previously, please do me the honour [sic] of once again enlightening me, with a yes or no answer.
Well what are you scared of… oh of course – the truth!…!
First off, the Korean government did not pay for the majority of their current network (and I mean well under half of the cost!).. full stop… They did put in a good amount of money but it’s money they had unlike Australia thanks to the wonderful spending and ridiculous borrowing of our recent government. This is a key part of the South Korea vs Australia roll out (having the Monty to pay for it or having to borrow the money to pay for it as well as having to pay interest on the borrowings so you really HAVE to calculate borrowings + interests to get more accurate figures)… Another thing fibre technologies cost allot more back when they did the roll out so although some have added inflation to bump up there investment value you can’t directly compare it that was as the technologies have reduced in price significantly since then (so why not factor that in your conversions as well?)
Another thing is South Korea was smart about the roll out to the customers and put up incentive’s for the roll out to end users, low margin loans from the government (so there government actually MADE money from the word go unlike ours that is paying interest and using money they don’t have from the word go… rather large difference here don’t you think?)
I would like to see a accurate comparison of ‘Total Cost’ of the current NBN plan in comparison to South Korea’s roll out back when the technology was really really expensive compared.. I think you will find we are not being very efficient, realistic, wasting allot of hard earned tax payers money, not getting the best return (bang for buck) and have not learned all we can/could have from the world leaders (South Korea)
First off, the Korean government did not pay for the majority of their current network (and I mean well under half of the cost!).. full stop…
No one said they did, and it isn’t full stop, even through the government didn’t fit the bill for it the economy in general would have to pay for it.
Another thing fibre technologies cost allot more back when they did the roll out so although some have added inflation to bump up there investment value you can’t directly compare it that was as the technologies have reduced in price significantly since then (so why not factor that in your conversions as well?)
Most people have considered this. You have to also consider that they didn’t roll out a FTTH network, only a FTTB network (which we can’t do in Australia because we don’t have such an insane population density).
I would like to see a accurate comparison of ‘Total Cost’ of the current NBN plan in comparison to South Korea’s roll out back when the technology was really really expensive compared.. I think you will find we are not being very efficient, realistic, wasting allot of hard earned tax payers money, not getting the best return (bang for buck) and have not learned all we can/could have from the world leaders (South Korea)
I would like to see this too. And I think you’ll find that we are being efficient, realistic, not wasting hard earned tax payers money, getting the best return and learned all we can from the world leaders. But I’m biased, and so it seems, so are you. So we should do the study regardless, and you know what I think in reality the result will look like? Somewhere in the middle.
Hi NightKhaos
Don’t get me wrong I think the NBN is necessary and a great idea I just don’t believe on the money being spend and HUGE debt it’s putting Australia in. If we had a nice surplus (like we use to) it would be a much better idea… But having to borrow money and pay back interest just seems like a complete waste of funds to me when we have so many other things that are lucking funding of need urgent assistance provided..etc..etc.
I do understand we are providing FTTH and that is great but I don’t believe we should be rolling it out to the 92% (or whatever it is) right away. Why not roll it out in stages to the most densely populated areas that are in need of it the most (eg, around hospitals, universities, dense housing..etc..etc, P.S. This does NOT include where I live!) This way as soon as you get things online you have instant income that is starting to pay off that debt… expand out from there and eventually hit the more remote area if it’s needed as this will be your least profitable and most expensive roll outs.
I don’t believe if you live out woop woop this means you are entitles to a fibre connection.. perhaps it would be nice to have access to a wireless technology or something more cost effective but I honestly don’t belive fibre is the answer… I know a handful of family friends that live on some great and very large lots, many are on them don’t even have town power or running water..etc..etc.. They say the last thing they want is fibre internet being connected… They run off rain tanks, rivers, solar power..etc..etc. They say it was their choice to live out there as it’s the life style they enjoy and love and do not expect to have to get access to fibre internet, if they want the latest and greatest they would move closer to the city.
Don’t get me wrong I think the NBN is necessary and a great idea I just don’t believe on the money being spend and HUGE debt it’s putting Australia in. If we had a nice surplus (like we use to) it would be a much better idea… But having to borrow money and pay back interest just seems like a complete waste of funds to me when we have so many other things that are lucking funding of need urgent assistance provided..etc..etc.
$36b of capital over 10 years isn’t that much for the government to spend considering the size of their budget. I do agree it would be better if we didn’t borrow to get it done, but I also disagree with waiting. I don’t thinking waiting is in Australia’s best interests.
I do understand we are providing FTTH and that is great but I don’t believe we should be rolling it out to the 92% (or whatever it is) right away. Why not roll it out in stages to the most densely populated areas that are in need of it the most (eg, around hospitals, universities, dense housing..etc..etc, P.S. This does NOT include where I live!) This way as soon as you get things online you have instant income that is starting to pay off that debt… expand out from there and eventually hit the more remote area if it’s needed as this will be your least profitable and most expensive roll outs.
It is a ten year project. The project is rolling out to specific problem and regional areas first. Trying to optimise for those that can’t get acceptable Broadband get the NBN first is one of the struggles that NBN Co will go through over the life of the project. But it’s a long project. It’s not like we start it tomorrow and it’s done in a couple of weeks.
I don’t believe if you live out woop woop this means you are entitles to a fibre connection.. perhaps it would be nice to have access to a wireless technology or something more cost effective but I honestly don’t belive fibre is the answer… I know a handful of family friends that live on some great and very large lots, many are on them don’t even have town power or running water..etc..etc.. They say the last thing they want is fibre internet being connected… They run off rain tanks, rivers, solar power..etc..etc. They say it was their choice to live out there as it’s the life style they enjoy and love and do not expect to have to get access to fibre internet, if they want the latest and greatest they would move closer to the city.
That is why the last 7% of the population are being giving wireless or satellite options rather than FTTH.
In all honesty, have you actually followed the project closely? Because based upon what you just said, I think you’re way behind in your information. The project, as it stands, apart from borrowing, seems to fit all your requirements as you have laid them out.
Those living in the denser areas typically already have access to a connection which is able to keep up with current demands. If we are only looking at a handful of years before the NBN comes to the big cities, they will be at less of a loss that others who currently only get ADSL speed through the current private monopoly.
IMO the real reason for the rollout being structured the way that it is is to get the most difficult sites out of the way first. I agree with many on here that the free market would eventually bring improved connection speeds to the major cities, but outside of those areas people never stood a chance. If the NBN starts backwards and commences the smaller cities and towns first, at least if Labour lose the next election the Libs would have less of an excuse to can the whole thing. If the cities were done first it would be easier to scrap the roll-out to those who need it the most.
This has all been planned for already with the costs taken into account for the rural first plan.
Hay NightKhaos
Yes I’ve been keeping up with it bud did loose interest a number of times over it… All I’m saying is I belive it’s a compleate waist of money… if you work out the cost per house hold (include interest, connection fee’s..etc..etc it’s a hell of a lot of money per connected house)… My argument is private companies would have done it any way and has already started before the NBN but withough the debt and interest charged to the tax payers… Yes this would mean it would have been city connected first but I agree 100% with that over what is currently being done… All I can get is ADSL-1 in my area which is 15KM out of Brisbane CBD, our business which is around 12KM from Brisbane CBD can only get ADSL2 as poor speeds and nothing better, we are an IT company and need better links yet can’t get them… why are we not being upgraded first, it’s our core business and we live in the 3rd largest city…
All I’m saying is I belive it’s a compleate waist of money
Which is fine, except your “suggestions” for “what should be done” are in fact, essentially, what the NBN is.
My argument is private companies would have done it any way and has already started before the NBN
Which is wrong on both counts, they won’t do it without government support, and they haven’t started doing it, where the “it” is improve Broadband access on a nationwide scale. The most they have done is their HFC networks, which were a complete failure by both companies in that they had to write off the CAPX.
Yes this would mean it would have been city connected first but I agree 100% with that over what is currently being done
All I can get is ADSL-1 in my area which is 15KM out of Brisbane CBD, our business which is around 12KM from Brisbane CBD can only get ADSL2 as poor speeds and nothing better, we are an IT company and need better links yet can’t get them… why are we not being upgraded first, it’s our core business and we live in the 3rd largest city…
So basicly, you think that market demand should dictate where is developed first, and then you’re complaining because the “market” has decided that you don’t have enough demand to justify better infrastructure.
Do you not see the problem here? Almost every single time you have tried to define what it is you want to be done to “fix” the problem, the answer you come up with is what the NBN is doing. Therefore the only objection you have with the NBN is cost. Congrats, you are at the same moral problem I find myself whenever I discuss this debate: is the NBN the most optimal solution to deliver what I consider important? And so far, the answer is, due to lack of presented viable alternatives, yes it is.
Hi NightKhaos
I think you misunderstand me in some cases and are taking things a little out of context.
I do NOT agree with the amount of money it’s costing at all… BUT as it’s going ahead any way there is not much that can be done other than now discuss their roll out plan.
I also do not agree AT ALL that regional areas should have access to the Fibre network by any means in the immediate future (this is until the major cities have been upgraded first, this will offer best value for money and fastest return on investment)
I also do not agree with the proposed 93% coverage, this is far to large for such a vast and large country or our size and a complete waist of funds and money.
If the government did not do the NBN roll out I’m rather confident the private sector would have rolled out fibre any way (they would have no option but to do this)… the NBN has been in talks for some time and of cause the big companies are not going to do a single thing whilst there is any possibility they can get a great network that they don’t have to pay for the initial setup compared to what it would cost them to do it… Brisbane City already had plans on rolling out Fibre by the city council until the NBN was announced/rolled out and now it’s been scrapped by the city council due to it… This is the point I’m making roll outs would have happened and would have been allot more cost effective and charged accordingly to your area (such as Brisbane City Councils roll out, local people would have paid what it costs them)… if rochampton did the same they would pay accordingly, if Darwin..etc..etc.. I have a HUGE issue having to pay the amount the government is spending when it should cost me a fraction of the price as a large amount of money is being completely waisted due to very high costs to install it out in regional area’s of which I don’t want access at and if I chose to live out that far I would NOT expect to have a fibre connection and if I did I would Expect to have to pay a large fee to get it connected at least. This is my main point and I strongly feel the government is wasting allot of money they do not have and both you and I and our children are going to be paying it back for many years to come…
Don’t get me wrong I believe fibre is one of the futures on internet connectivity as wireless is just as important if not more so for business and mobility needs but not at the price we are paying for it… Also another point 3G wireless is ok but should the government also roll out the new 4G network as well? I don’t believe so… and BECAUSE they are not thinking about it guess what Telstra is already starting to plan and roll out there 4G network at their expense of which we will not be taxed for to pay it back..etc..etc.. if we want to use it we can chose to just like I believe the fibre network should be.
Hope that explains my point a little better… all the best!
P.S. “The cost of the project has climbed $200,000 to $35.9 billion, with $27.5 billion in government equity and another $13.4 billion expected to be leveraged in debt from 2015.”
I think you misunderstand me in some cases and are taking things a little out of context.
Nope. I haven’t been. Everytime you suggest a “solution” to the problem, for example, wireless to regional areas “out in woop woop”, you have suggested what the NBN will be doing. Everytime you complain about the current state of the market you have requested what the NBN will try and address. I’m sorry, but the only argument in your posts I can find against the NBN is the cost.
I do NOT agree with the amount of money it’s costing at all… BUT as it’s going ahead any way there is not much that can be done other than now discuss their roll out plan.
I also do not agree AT ALL that regional areas should have access to the Fibre network by any means in the immediate future (this is until the major cities have been upgraded first, this will offer best value for money and fastest return on investment)
And it has been optimised to try and give a balance underprivileged and high demand areas, both addressing your concern that “profitable areas” should get it first to mitigate the cost, and the general concern that prompted the project of areas not having access to decent Broadband at all. You can’t have it both ways.
If we address the cites first then the entity doing the rollout can decide, at any moment, that underprivileged areas “are not worth the cost”. Now when you consider the whole reason that the government was prompted to try and address Broadband in the first place was because of said underprivileged areas, what precisely will the justification for the NBN? The free market can cherry pick the cites just fine afterall, and they have.
If we address the regional areas first the entity doing the rollout will find that the rollout is not sustainable because it cannot afford the CAPX it will have to pay in order to do the rollout.
So the NBN, like any project of this nature, is doing a mix of areas.
I also do not agree with the proposed 93% coverage, this is far to large for such a vast and large country or our size and a complete waist of funds and money.
No it isn’t, because the majority of our cities and towns are heavily urbanised. Look a the NBN coverage map, and look how little that “93%” of our population is in relation to continent. IT News has a good article with the coverage maps. Please note the following:
Although fibre costs more to deploy, it was likely to have a higher uptake — and cost was not prohibitive, the study found, highlighting lower backhaul cost estimates than those initially anticipated.
If the government did not do the NBN roll out I’m rather confident the private sector would have rolled out fibre any way (they would have no option but to do this)
Have you paid any attention at all to the state of play of the market? Please, I suggest you read what Optus said a few months ago in relation to the NBN here. In particular note the following:
People talk about letting infrastructure competition work. Maybe you should learn a lesson from history,” Krishnapillai said.
“We have empirical evidence of what happened in the late nineties where Optus rolled out a pay TV network down streets in suburban Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.
“Telstra went down the same streets, carpet-bombed the business case and effectively Optus and Telstra wrote off over $1 billion through that period. We were losing $300 million a year through that period at Optus.
“So for those that are very brave to ask – and this is always interesting when people tell other people how to spend their money – for those who are very brave to say we should let infrastructure competition continue, [I say] throw money into it.
“We’ve certainly seen empirical evidence that that will not work and that’s one of the main reasons we support the NBN.”
Brisbane City already had plans on rolling out Fibre by the city council until the NBN was announced/rolled out and now it’s been scrapped by the city council due to it
Actually that was cancelled because the entity in who made the tender for the BCC was being unrealistic with their network design and cost projections. The BCC project is still under discussions, but with other tenders. And might I also note this was not a private enterprise initiative, it is an initiative of the BCC, a legislative body, like the government.
This is the point I’m making roll outs would have happened and would have been allot more cost effective and charged accordingly to your area (such as Brisbane City Councils roll out, local people would have paid what it costs them)
And if your council decides it doesn’t want to do the roll-out because it is too expensive, what then? Because Telstra and Optus sure as hell aren’t going to roll fibre by your door anytime soon, if the HFC wars are anything to go by. The whole point of the Federal government spear heading this initiative is so that everyone get’s access to fast Broadband. Not just those lucky enough to sit an any area being considered for a fibre or HFC rollout by the council or a telco.
I have a HUGE issue having to pay the amount the government is spending when it should cost me a fraction of the price as a large amount of money is being completely waisted due to very high costs to install it out in regional area’s of which I don’t want access at and if I chose to live out that far I would NOT expect to have a fibre connection and if I did I would Expect to have to pay a large fee to get it connected at least. This is my main point and I strongly feel the government is wasting allot of money they do not have and both you and I and our children are going to be paying it back for many years to come…
You are overstating the cost. I cannot stress this enough. Yes it is expensive, but it is only $36 billion dollars in CAPX. The government collections about $350 billion dollars in taxes per year. It is therefore the equivalent of the average family purchasing a car on higher purchase. It sure as hell would not take the average family generations to pay for that car would it?
Did I also mention that those out in the deep bush are not getting fibre? I believe I did. Also,the argument that only those who want fibre should get it it so short sighted it is not funny. Do you understand the the majority of the cost associated with building a network is the civic works so much so that any company, including a private Telco, lays what is known as “dark fibre” or “redundant cables” whenever they are building? This is because it is much cheaper to attach that cable at two ends than it is dig a new trench if a new service needs to be provisioned somewhere. By at least an order of magnitude. So by doing it this way they are actually saving a lot of money. Because what if you change your mind and say “actually I did want fibre” or what if you move out and the family that comes in after you say “we want fibre”. Multiple that by a couple tens of thousand cases over the years and it’ll start to cost a lot to rollout these ad-hoc connections won’t it?
Also another point 3G wireless is ok but should the government also roll out the new 4G network as well? I don’t believe so…
They aren’t and won’t. They are however rolling out fixed wireless connections to remote residences. These technology, although likely based upon the current 4G technologies like LTE, are actually very different to their mobile wireless cousins.
and BECAUSE they are not thinking about it guess what Telstra is already starting to plan and roll out there 4G network at their expense of which we will not be taxed for to pay it back..etc..etc.. if we want to use it we can chose to just like I believe the fibre network should be.
Which is fine, and I’m looking for to LTE from Telstra, but that does not excuse the fact that our fixed line infrastructure is in need of improvement, and as already stated, no one is willing to pay for it except governments and councils. Based upon the history of mobile wireless telephony, the LTE network will not be able to compete on two counts, latency (specificity the connection will suffer from high jitter when contended) and quota (currently internet quotas are 5x – 10x more expensive on mobile wireless, and I don’t see this changing based upon the fact that according to the ABS the amount of mobile broadband data used has stagnated).
Hope that explains my point a little better… all the best!
Nope, you basic just solidified what I already thought you were saying.
“I think you misunderstand me in some cases and are taking things a little out of context. Nope. I haven’t been. Everytime you suggest a “solution” to the problem, for example, wireless to regional areas “out in woop woop”, you have suggested what the NBN will be doing.”
Well NightKhaos I give up then… if you can’t understand what I’m saying let me put if very basicly…
I do not agree the government should be using taxpayers money to build a NBN, in other words the solution for me is DO NOT BUILD IT and stop wasting our money!
In regards to the costs it’s closer to costing the tax payer $50,000,000,000 at the moment and who knows it could to higher! As for your comment about putting it in perspective of what they collect each year that’s totally irrelevant as just about all that money is already used up so they will have to tax us more or get the money to pay it off which they don’t have and they are also borrowing to build as they have already waisted our surplus we had before they took over which I also am VERY angry about the way this government just waists and spends money!
As for a fibre network never being build in Australia dn the cable network yes that was a complete waist of money but partly the cable network was scrapped due to ADSL technologies looking like a good alternative however it was not… Also there really was not much competition back then either, there still is not but there is at least more now than back then.
Telstra has already announced that even if the NBN is scrapped or does not go ahead they will build a fibre network any way but guess what NOT with tax payers money! THAT IS MY POINT!!! Why are the taxpayers paying for this? The government is also paying the telcos (or Telstra so far) as well so even more money wasted for something Telstra should be paying for in the first place.
If the NBN does go ahead why the hell are they planning on selling it if it’s going to be very profitable eventually why not keep it as an income which then help reduce our taxes in say 10-20 years or however long it takes to become really profitable (if it ever does)
My point is according to your argument why are not expecting the government to roll out 4G wireless to 9x% of the country as well this is also needed is it not? Where do you draw the line what governments should build/run… In QLD our local government is selling off all our assets as they have also run us into massive dept and doing a short term cash grab.
Yes allot of it is due to cost for me, and YES this governments spending spree will affect my kids and includes other spending ontop of the NBN with funding they do not have and the funding they had has been basically thrown away. I do not trust them and I do not want them to spend my hard earned cash as they definitely do not deserve the money but unfortunately get it by default and seem to be able to ‘waist’ it in any way they want.
Also after they have build this wonderful network using my money (tax payers), we then pay extra to get it connected to our house, we then pay extra every month, we then pay extra for different speeds and pay extra for different download limits as well… What the hell is wrong with this country? If they build the thing with our money why limit us both on speed and downloads ISP’s purchase capacity not transfers… Other countries do not have limits on speed or downloads why we do… This should be part of the NBN’s agreement that no capacity or ridiculous speed limits should be imposed either.
Any way I give up, I’m not sure what else I can say.. I think it’s a complete waste of money and to me I would rather wait for the telco’s/private sector to build a network and can afford to wait and I’m not getting the NBN in my area any time soon any way.. I’ve just contacted them and they said they can’t tell me what area’s it will be rolled out to next, soon or when I can expect to have it in my area, I asked will I have it in 3,4,5,6,7 years time if the NBN keeps getting build they said they can’t answer that and are not sure at this stage. CRAZY, great roll out plan they have in place. I’m paying for this network and can’t get any details on it at all… I prefer Telstra to build there’s and be in the same boat as well and not have to pay a single $1 instead of paying thousands upon thousands of dollars per house extra.
So to sumarise the NBN is not the solution that best fits my requirements, my requirements is NOT to waist our tax money = NO NBN thanks I can wait for Telstra to build one of which I will probably get access to faster as they will connect cities first where this stupid government is connecting minorities and if it’s scrapped what a bigger waste of money, Cost benefit analysis please… ow yes ever exempt has been blocked and our new ‘I’m all about transparency government’ that wants to lock documents away in regards to the NBN… what are they hiding… I just do not trust them one little bit…
Any way I think that’s enough.. just did a quick search and found a few interesting reads on this as well… Looks like I’m not the only one thinking this might just be a bit of a waist of money…
http://nationalbroadbandnetwork.net.au/2010/11/nbn-a-waste-of-money-japan-it-mogul/
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/nbns-opportunity-costs-mount-for-labo-evidence-mounts-that-the-numbers-dont-add-up/story-e6frg8zx-1226010343118
http://www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/story/2011/02/21/nbn-network-is-rolling-out-waste-broadband/
http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/378845/telstra_reveals_fibre-optic_plan_b/?fp=4&fpid=78268965
Any way enough from me… I still think it’s a waist of money no matter what I read on it I prefer our government to have money in the bank and by the time that happens other telo’s would have fibre rolled out any way at no cost to the taxpayer…
I do not agree the government should be using taxpayers money to build a NBN, in other words the solution for me is DO NOT BUILD IT and stop wasting our money!
You have stated this. You don’t think the cost justifies the outcome. I got this.
In regards to the costs it’s closer to costing the tax payer $50,000,000,000 at the moment and who knows it could to higher!
No. It isn’t going to cost the tax payer this much. In fact, it isn’t going to cost the tax payer a cent assuming the business case stacks up. But even if the business case is such an epic failure that none of the capital can be covered by operational profit, i.e. the amount of government debt that will is covered by taxpayers, it’ll only be in the order $27 billion + $11 billion for the Telstra deal because no sane company will invest in such a doomed to fail project now will they meaning that NBN Co can’t get it’s private debt it needs. But I very much doubt to you that the debt will get that bad before someone realises that “it isn’t working” and the project becomes defunct.
Telstra has already announced that even if the NBN is scrapped or does not go ahead they will build a fibre network any way but guess what NOT with tax payers money! THAT IS MY POINT!!! Why are the taxpayers paying for this? The government is also paying the telcos (or Telstra so far) as well so even more money wasted for something Telstra should be paying for in the first place.
Where is this so called announcement? All I can see is Telstra’s “Plan B” which is a “least cost solution”, in no part did they say the technology they will be rolling out is Fibre, nor that they will continue to roll it out despite the NBN.
If the NBN does go ahead why the hell are they planning on selling it if it’s going to be very profitable eventually why not keep it as an income which then help reduce our taxes in say 10-20 years or however long it takes to become really profitable (if it ever does)
The greens are fighting to have this particular part of legislation removed but it stems from the fact that everyone seems to think, especially the Coalition, that privatisation of assets is the way to go. I fundamentally disagree with privatising it also, but this is a minor issue for me.
My point is according to your argument why are not expecting the government to roll out 4G wireless to 9x% of the country as well this is also needed is it not? Where do you draw the line what governments should build/run… In QLD our local government is selling off all our assets as they have also run us into massive dept and doing a short term cash grab.
No. That is not my argument at all. Have you been paying attention? The fixed line market is failing to deliver adequate service. The mobile wireless network is healthy and not in need of government intervention. I do not believe that everything should be run by the state, I’m a capitalist. This arguement here is reductio ad absurdum in it’s worse form and actually insults me a little.
Yes allot of it is due to cost for me, and YES this governments spending spree will affect my kids and includes other spending ontop of the NBN with funding they do not have and the funding they had has been basically thrown away. I do not trust them and I do not want them to spend my hard earned cash as they definitely do not deserve the money but unfortunately get it by default and seem to be able to ‘waist’ it in any way they want.
So basicly because Labor are a bad party they can’t be trusted? I’ve heard this before and I think it is the most short sighted argument against the NBN I have ever heard. Did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, they got this one right? Or are you going to assume that everything Labor does is wrong? Where does this stem from? Blind faith in the opposition?
Also after they have build this wonderful network using my money (tax payers), we then pay extra to get it connected to our house, we then pay extra every month, we then pay extra for different speeds and pay extra for different download limits as well… What the hell is wrong with this country? If they build the thing with our money why limit us both on speed and downloads ISP’s purchase capacity not transfers… Other countries do not have limits on speed or downloads why we do… This should be part of the NBN’s agreement that no capacity or ridiculous speed limits should be imposed either.
You do not pay to have it connected to your house. The initial roll-out is free.
So what? You think since we spent so much tax payers money on say, the original PMG network, we shouldn’t have to pay for phone calls? You think that since we spent so much tax payers money on say, Australia post, we shouldn’t have to pay to send a letter?
And I’m sorry, but the quota’s you should take up with your ISP, but I hate to break it to you bucko, but in the rest of the world everyone is charged for a set bandwidth. Take Virgin Media in the UK, you have to pay for different speed tiers with their network.
Any way I give up, I’m not sure what else I can say.. I think it’s a complete waste of money and to me I would rather wait for the telco’s/private sector to build a network and can afford to wait…
You will be waiting a very long time.
I’m not getting the NBN in my area any time soon any way.. I’ve just contacted them and they said they can’t tell me what area’s it will be rolled out to next, soon or when I can expect to have it in my area, I asked will I have it in 3,4,5,6,7 years time if the NBN keeps getting build they said they can’t answer that and are not sure at this stage.
Because it is a dynamic problem. There are a lot of areas to consider, and prioritising them is a very hard process for them. And the environment they are working will be constantly changing with new houses being built and redevelopments. You are being wholely unreasonable to expect them to have a finite, set in stone, roll out plan.
It was nice debating with you. Even if you weren’t willing to concede any of my points, and thought that I was completely misunderstand what you were saying (I wasn’t).
And we all lived happily ever after…
Ok for the rest of us here in reality
Hi again NightKhaos
Though I would have one last crack at this:
You said your self it will cost us “in the order $27 billion + $11 billion for the Telstra” however this does not include any interest at all which there is going to be an absolute bucket load and in the billions as well…
In regards to Telstra’s backup plan they have released it is going to be a Fibre-Optic Network as per there press conference… Even the newspapers are reporting “Telstra reveals fibre-optic plan B” a snip from the article reads as follows ‘Telecommunications giant Telstra (ASX:TLS) has revealed at a retail shareholder meeting in Sydney this week that it is planning its own fibre-optic network for Australian cities if the National Broadband Network (NBN) does not go ahead.”
In regards to the 4G network, sorry it insults you but my point is if the government does not give out hand outs of my tax money they will eventually get fibre (of which other companies had started already such as PIPE Networks and other smaller companies with new housing estates which would eventually be rolled out to existing suburbs)
With not trusting labour you miss a rather large chunk of my argument… They have already put us in massive debt that is a rather large point, I belive they have waisted so much money and as I’ve always said IF our government has money in the back perhaps my thoughts on the NBN might be diferent but having to waist even more money on what they have already throwen away I would much rather prefer them to get us back to surpluss ASAP. You are right I’m currently not a labour supporter at the moment and I vote on which ever government I think has the best policy at the time, I have voted for Labour before but not in the last election as I have not agreed with the current governments spending, policies and execution so hope that takes me out of the “I hate labour and always will” stereo type group!
In regards to the installation fee let me point you to internodes current FC plans:
“For a limited time, the setup fees for a standard installation on the NBN Stage 1 Network are:
* where the ‘build drop’ fibre has been installed : $0
* where the ‘build drop’ fibre has not been installed : $99”
Notice the “for a limited time” statement, I don’t like this and it seems people are paying the $99 install fee when reading through forums so yes it would seem you very well might have to pay the install fee as well.
Thanks for the wonderful in site into other counties ‘buko’ but I have family in the UK as well as Korea none of them pay for any download limits and there speeds are in the MB/s (that’s Mega Bytes not Mega bits!) for a fraction of the cost we pay so I would strongly suggest you do a little more research and speak to people on the ground not doing a google search and finding a nice expensive plan that supports your argument… What I’m saying is we are paying for this huge network why limit us on both fronts (speed and capacity to download?) for your information ISP’s don’t pay for capacity they pay for bandwidth at the moment, with the FC network I’m guessing allot of these limitation should be reduced due to the huge amount of bandwidth made available especially for local traffic… So if they still want to impose limits chose one not two… Eg, have 1-3 speed tears if you like but not speed and capacity that’s just ridiculous. And no I do not expect free phone calls and free post that’s a relatively large difference but thanks for the “reductio ad absurdum” argument… ROFL
I don’t believe and am very confident an alternative plan will not take any longer than 10 years for me to see/access in Brisbane if the NBN was never put forward… I have no doubt in my mind fibre would have come with or without the NBN only difference is tax payers would have not paid for it.
“You are being wholely unreasonable to expect them to have a finite, set in stone, roll out plan.”
All I can say is I would expect them to know at least a year or two in the future at the moment they can’t even tell me what’s happing a few months ahead of time… lack of planning and poor management spring to mind… If they rolled out and updated the cities first it would make there life allot easier but I guess again labour has to roll our regional as it’s the regional guys that put them in power so I can see there sticky point in not doing the right thing but going for the cave in option to waist as much money as possible to rolling our regional first.
“It was nice debating with you. Even if you weren’t willing to concede any of my points, and thought that I was completely misunderstand what you were saying (I wasn’t).”
I feel the same… have a good one… Cheers
You said your self it will cost us “in the order $27 billion + $11 billion for the Telstra” however this does not include any interest at all which there is going to be an absolute bucket load and in the billions as well…
NBNCo is borrowing from the Government. NBNCo pays interest, the taxpayer does not pay interest.
“NBNCo is borrowing from the Government. NBNCo pays interest, the taxpayer does not pay interest.”
That’s hilarious, where do think the Government gets its money from in the first place the magic faraway tree? – it’s taxpayer funds.
Oh and the NBN Co is a 100% totally taxpayer funded quasi Government department, when you say it pays the interest you mean the owners of the NBN Co pay the interest – yep the sucker taxpayer.
That’s hilarious, where do think the Government gets its money from in the first place the magic faraway tree? – it’s taxpayer funds.
Jonathan’s confusion was that the interest that NBNCo pays on the $27b was somehow coming from the tax payers, which is not the case. The interest is going to the taxpayers. NBNCo pays the interest on the loan (and the capital, of course) by selling wholesale access to their network, it would be pretty weird if the government gave them taxpayer’s money to pay back the taxpayers they borrowed from in the first place…
If we assume things go as planned, then NBNCo will pay back the government the $27b it borrowed in the first place, plus interest. Taxpayers are only out of pocket if NBNCo fails.
The underlying basis of your assertion is that the NBN Co makes a profit, and that is costs are less than revenue at some vague point of time in the cloudy future that is fixed line BB in Australia.
Costs are already estimated at being $43 billion, and it doesn’t matter what proportion is loans + interest on the payback, that’s a hell of a lot of revenue from fixed line wholesale BB via ISP’s from a fickle market which is moving its product focus away from fixed line to wireless based BB and telephony anyway.
If you care to look at the Telstra and SingTel financials the highest ARPU’s are from wireless data customers, and the trend overseas indicates this as well, which of course is no help to the NBN Co, it’s not selling wireless.
The underlying basis of your assertion is that the NBN Co makes a profit, and that is costs are less than revenue at some vague point of time in the cloudy future that is fixed line BB in Australia.
That is the basis of pretty much any business case. I would love you to present a business case where either the point of profitably is known or the business case assumes that the company can run in loss indefinitely.
Costs are already estimated at being $43 billion, and it doesn’t matter what proportion is loans + interest on the payback, that’s a hell of a lot of revenue from fixed line wholesale BB via ISP’s from a fickle market which is moving its product focus away from fixed line to wireless based BB and telephony anyway.
Because their is a higher ARPU meaning you can get a higher return from mobile wireless based solutions, despite the technical limitations. This is known, all it means is that the APRU for fixed line broadband is lower, not that it is non-existent.
If you care to look at the Telstra and SingTel financials the highest ARPU’s are from wireless data customers, and the trend overseas indicates this as well, which of course is no help to the NBN Co, it’s not selling wireless.
And what precisely is your point? There is still huge market demand for fixed line connections, the fact that you can get a higher ARPU from mobile wireless is not justification to stop providing wired solutions, because their are some services which will not run adequately on a mobile wireless connection.
So yes, wireless has a better ARPU, but what has that got to do with the NBN? Does it remove the need for us to upgrade our fixed line network? No, It doesn’t.
Hi Dean, cheers for clearing that up for me but I still think it’s wrong as the Government still really owns NBNCo. and when they go to sell it who ever buys it up is going to be left with the debt and that includes the interest meaning we are paying for it still as it will come off the purchase price so us tax payers are loosing/wasting money we don’t have no matter what way you look at it.
“Hi Dean, cheers for clearing that up for me but I still think it’s wrong”
Do you have any idea how ridiculous this sounds? You thank someone for pointing out the truth, but then you choose to ignore it.
And a handy tip for you: If you’re going to mistrust and criticise the Labor party. You should probably learn how to spell their name first.
Hi Simon
It’s not suppose to sound ridiculous or condescending (or what ever you want to call it)…Dean made a good point I was not aware of and thanked him for that. However I also made the point that longer term it’s still going to cost us money either way. That’s my point, I did not ingnore it I explained the way I see it (how is that ignoring what was said?)
As for having a typo in the spelling of the Labor party, I’m ow so sorry if this offends you so much, Also just to get my point on your wonderful statement about I need to learn how to spell before I “mistrust and criticise” them.. To me I don’t have to learn how to speelleee to criticise any party, spelling as nothing to do with it, but I do apologise profusely as it seems it’s most important to you.
You’re missing the point Jonathan (you’ve shown you’re very good at that).
If you want to be taken seriously in life, you should learn to spell. That goes with any adult argument, but particularly so when it comes to discussing politics. How are we supposed to give your views any credibility if you haven’t even bothered to check the spelling of the party who governs Australia? Kind of makes you look a little out of your depth, don’t you think?
I understand but I guess it depends how much of a pedantic person you are and how much media influences you I guess, As just about every PM we’ve had has used words out of context before the media makes a huge issue out of it, if I understand what they mean it’s not a big deal to me but the media blows it up and makes it a huge issue instead of getting on with the job. So yes, correct spelling is important (to a degree) I agree but should not become the main point. I feel one of the major issues with politics today is the average man is not included but rather so the university graduate that does not have much real live experience, perhaps this is why some consider spelling so important and not the real issues now days.
P.S. before I get another snark remark about that, YES I have had a tertiary education if that’s important for you or others, did I do well, yes, has it helped me get a job yes, have I applied most of the work learned/studded I would have to say perhaps to no unfortunately, am I happy I did it, yes.
Also there is a difference between ignoring comments and disagreeing with them! I disagree with most of them and still believe it’s a waste of money and it could be better spent or better yet saved for now if that means I’m ignoring points being made well that’s not my problem I know I have not.
P.S. I’m typing most of these replies in a rush as am rather busy so please forgive me if grammar and spelling are not that important to me personally, Again I truly apologies to any one I offend.
Also our government does not have the $27Billion to loan out in the first place so they are also loaning the money to loan it on again to the NBN, I’m not sure at what rates but details like that would be very interesting to know…
In regards to Telstra’s backup plan they have released it is going to be a Fibre-Optic Network as per there press conference… Even the newspapers are reporting “Telstra reveals fibre-optic plan B” a snip from the article reads as follows ‘Telecommunications giant Telstra (ASX:TLS) has revealed at a retail shareholder meeting in Sydney this week that it is planning its own fibre-optic network for Australian cities if the National Broadband Network (NBN) does not go ahead.”
And as I said that it is a “least cost solution” meaning it won’t, and I stress this, won’t be a FTTH network to the majority of the country. They will use FTTN solutions, improving backhaul, and basicly what I consider to be a “band-aid” solution to the problem.
In regards to the 4G network, sorry it insults you but my point is if the government does not give out hand outs of my tax money they will eventually get fibre (of which other companies had started already such as PIPE Networks and other smaller companies with new housing estates which would eventually be rolled out to existing suburbs)
PIPE networks rolls out dark fibre, and has a very limited footprint. New estates getting Fibre is irrelevent, when will the rest of the established suburbs get fibre? They won’t. Telstra has no interest in rollout out Fibre on that level.
Thanks for the wonderful in site into other counties ‘buko’ but I have family in the UK as well as Korea none of them pay for any download limits and there speeds are in the MB/s (that’s Mega Bytes not Mega bits!) for a fraction of the cost we pay so I would strongly suggest you do a little more research and speak to people on the ground not doing a google search and finding a nice expensive plan that supports your argument
I lived in the UK for three years and you know what, I can use Google and look up the connections. And you know what I found?
One, they are still given speeds in MEGABITS PER SECOND. This is standard across the world.
Two, yes, I know they don’t have quota’s, so, that’s an RSP problem, nothing to do with the NBN. We have “unlimited” plans here too from selected RSPs.
Three. Yes, I know they pay less for Broadband on average, again, so what? You do realise the majority of the RSPs in bigger countries like the UK use another asset, like their mobile network in the case of O2 and Orange, or their PayTV in the case of BSkyB and VIrginMedia, to offset the cost of Broadband? You realise that here in Australia when have a shortage of backhaul, which BTW the NBN consists of a $200 million subsidy to NextGen networks to recitfy.
I’m sorry, but you can’t directly compare us to the rest of the world, and if you are going to try too at least get your facts straight.
What I’m saying is we are paying for this huge network why limit us on both fronts (speed and capacity to download?) for your information ISP’s don’t pay for capacity they pay for bandwidth at the moment
Yes, I know they don’t pay for quota. They pay for bandwidth capacity and try and get a contention ratio such that they can deliver you your quota when you want it. If you don’t want to pay for quota’s TAKE IT UP WITH YOUR ISP. Because the NBN will still only be charging for bandwidth tiers at the wholesale level.
I don’t believe and am very confident an alternative plan will not take any longer than 10 years for me to see/access in Brisbane if the NBN was never put forward… I have no doubt in my mind fibre would have come with or without the NBN only difference is tax payers would have not paid for it.
No, FTTH will not come without some from of government support. How else can I put this too you? I tried to explain to why this is by citing the HFC network wars between Telstra and Optus as an example as to why it just doesn’t work like that. But you refused to listen.
“I’m sorry, but you can’t directly compare us to the rest of the world, and if you are going to try too at least get your facts straight.”
I believe my facts are straight and honest, if you chose to take them out of contex to your advantage that’s not my problem. When I said internet in UK and Korea (two places I know about for now) and mentioned there speeds can be reported in MegaBytes/s I’m talking about download speeds, I understand the standard is to report in mbps but my point is speeds are allot better. I also never said there was no speed limits in UK or Korea in fact I said the following “none of them pay for any download limits and “there speeds” are in the MB/s ” as mentioned already I know technically the plans are still signed up as Mbps but realistically it could be reported in MBps (just won’t be as big a number that’s all), I also know when we get fibre we will also have the speed but it looks like we will also have a download quota as well which is wrong.
Why do I say it’s wrong, the government is spending all our money on this network, ISP’s and large telco’s (that should be paying for it has basically had a massive job done for them)… The government should have the power to say our network our rules; If you want to on sell you can limit customers by speeds but not downloads for example. This makes comparing plans for consumers allot easier and in line with the rest of the world.
My voice against my ISP is worthless you think any ISP will listed to a hand full of customers complain of a government that lays down the rules (who has a better chance of outcome?)
At the end of the day you believe if the NBN is not build now, no company will ever build a FTTH network in Australia, that’s fair enough it’s your opinion that I disagree with. I believe FTTH will have to be build and there is not much other option but for them to build it, there is no way in the world they will stick to ADSL2+ and copper based solutions for the long run the upkeep is higher and the switch will eventually HAVE to come especially as some of the copper will need replacing and FC backlines are already in place or getting installed already.
We could go on forever but will never come to a conclusion as you want the NBN at whatever cost as well as regional access were I disagree with both these points and am willing to wait for a non government network or perhaps a better joint funded (could be incentive based for Telco’s or whatever that would be a better cost for taxpayers)
Let’s just agree to disagree on this one, I don’t want them to spend the money you don’t mind, that’s really the bottom of it.
All the best!
I believe my facts are straight and honest, if you chose to take them out of contex to your advantage that’s not my problem.
Actually it is, because your facts aren’t ambiguous, they are wrong. You said that in the rest of the world Broadband Speed is measured in Megabytes per second. And cited the UK as an examples.
Yet… BeThere, BT, VirginMedia, three large and popular ISPs in the UK all measure download speeds in megabits per second. Thus your point is wrong.
When I said internet in UK and Korea (two places I know about for now) and mentioned there speeds can be reported in MegaBytes/s I’m talking about download speeds, I understand the standard is to report in mbps but my point is speeds are allot better.
See now you’re changing your article. You said they WERE reported in Megabytes per second, not that they can be. I can report my connection in Megabytes per second too, it is up too 3.75MB/s down and 156kB/s up. Divide by 8, it’s not hard. I won’t report it that way because in actuality you will not get those speeds on any active download because of protocol overheads.
Further more, what precisely was the point you were trying to make with the reported in Megabytes per second? There is none. It is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the need, or lack thereof for the NBN does it?
I also know when we get fibre we will also have the speed but it looks like we will also have a download quota as well which is wrong.
No, that isn’t something the to do with the NBN, as I attempted to explain. The quotas are implemented by the ISP as a traffic management technique to ensure fair usage to all on the network. The NBN does not force ISPs to make the plans quoted. So what precisely is the point you are trying to make here? There is none. It is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the need, or lack thereof for the NBN does it?
Why do I say it’s wrong, the government is spending all our money on this network, ISP’s and large telco’s (that should be paying for it has basically had a massive job done for them)… The government should have the power to say our network our rules; If you want to on sell you can limit customers by speeds but not downloads for example. This makes comparing plans for consumers allot easier and in line with the rest of the world.
Okay, so finally a useful point, but this problem is not exclusive to the NBN. The NBN does not make this a consideration for the government. So what precisely is the point here? There is none. It is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the need, or lack thereof for the NBN does it?
My voice against my ISP is worthless you think any ISP will listed to a hand full of customers complain of a government that lays down the rules (who has a better chance of outcome?)
ISPs have listened. Take TPG, they currently offer unlimited plans on their ADSL2+ services. If you seriously think that the government needs to step in over the “quota” and “high prices problem” then fine, but I disagree.
But again, this doesn’t have anything to do with the need, or lack thereof for the NBN does it?
At the end of the day you believe if the NBN is not build now, no company will ever build a FTTH network in Australia, that’s fair enough it’s your opinion that I disagree with. I believe FTTH will have to be build and there is not much other option but for them to build it, there is no way in the world they will stick to ADSL2+ and copper based solutions for the long run the upkeep is higher and the switch will eventually HAVE to come especially as some of the copper will need replacing and FC backlines are already in place or getting installed already.
I don’t think you understand the fundamental problem I am trying to highlight to you. You make it seem absolutist. The NBN, or no FTTH. It isn’t like that at all. We are talking about directly addressing a failed market here. A market that will be incapable of fixing itself over a reasonable timescale. And that’s key. If we wait for private enterprise to do it you will be waiting a very long time. Meanwhile we’ll fall more and more behind the developed world in terms of Broadband service. I think this is unacceptable for Australia, and we must be taking corrective action.
Sure, in 50 years time we might get universal FTTH access under the free market. But in those 50 years time the likes of South Korea, the United Kingdom, Japan, the United States, and New Zealand, all of whom have some kind of Broadband plan, will have pushed further and further ahead of us. If you want to “bring us in line with the rest of the world” as you keep suggesting, this does not seem the right way to do it.
We could go on forever but will never come to a conclusion as you want the NBN at whatever cost as well as regional access were I disagree with both these points and am willing to wait for a non government network or perhaps a better joint funded (could be incentive based for Telco’s or whatever that would be a better cost for taxpayers)
No. You are making assumptions about me. You have assumed that I think the NBN is the only solution here. It isn’t. But how am I meant to demonstrate that to you if you continue to misunderstand what it is the NBN is doing, let alone trying to present a valid alternative. Neither of which you have done.
I don’t even think you understand what it is the problem that the NBN is trying to solve. How can you provide well reasoned debate on the NBN if you don’t even know what it is for? That is like trying to argue buses are bad method of mass transit without having observed peak hour traffic and how it can be reduced by the use of buses.
I’ve said what I can I am not going to waste any more time on this… You don’t agree with my side and I don’t agree with yours, you think the NBN is the only option available for us where I would prefer a more most cost effective solution that tax payers don’t have to pay directly for especcialy with our massively huge deficit our government has racked up (even if it takes a little extra time) that’s really the choice.
Have a good weekend
Let me try and clear this up again…. You are referring to the advertised speed’s by ISP’s I’m refering to the practical speeds that end users see when downloading files, it’s that simple, end of the day the speeds match up and are simply a difference between bits and bytes.
Trust me I understand about bits and bytes and have been working in IT for well over 15 years so I get the difference. The point I was making is they have better speeds than us and it can be translated into MB/s, I understand you have used the Australian equivalent of 3MB/s but no one really gets that over ADSL2+.. .My point was most people in Australia are under 1MB/s download speeds and download in the KB/s range and not MB/s that’s all I was saying back then.
“But again, this doesn’t have anything to do with the need, or lack thereof for the NBN does it?”
What I’m trying to say is AS the NBN is going ahead now and funded by the tax payers I believe we (the taxpayers of the network) should at least have some say on some conditions for the network. I don’t believe they should get a free network build for them then be able to rip off the people that paid to build it by imposing limits that are not needed and due to their stinginess, they have already gotten/getting a free network build of which they should have paid for in the first place.
I still believe we can’t get to the bottom of this, you firmly believe private sector will not implement a FTTH network were I believe it has to happen or a better plan could be put in place to encourage it. I honestly believe it would not take any longer than 10 years for us to get fibre in the major cities if the NBN was scrapped. Smarter ways to encourage privates to build these networks would be for the governments to offer tax incentives or programs like that… I don’t know the details and am not paid to come up with the idea’s either but I’m very confident major cities around Australia would get a FTTH network (it has to happen in time)
I have offered suggestions what else could be looked into such as some of the articles I posted before (such as what Japans currently doing with their roll out) also the incentives for companies to build infrastructure or for governments to keep control of the build infrastructure and not sell if off so we the tax payer can benefit from it long term I think these are all suggestions I’ve offered so again don’t believe I’ve dismissed everything and believe I’ve offered alternatives that would be acceptable and fair to the opposite side.
To be honest for the price of the NBN you are correct I fail to see the problem that is solves that can’t be solved without spending the amount of money that is being spent, that might be my issue but I see it as the reason for not wanting the NBN funded by our tax money and leaving it up to privates or coming up with other solutions like incentives for companies that do or even improving on regulations against combined wholesale and retail companies such as Telstra..etc..etc.
As I said before this is not going to be sorted in this discussion you are for it I’m against it, the current government is pushing it forward so you win and get your NBN, my kids and I lose because I get a bill for something I don’t have to have right now and something I don’t want my tax money spend on, that’s life nothing I can do about it.
Let me try and clear this up again…. You are referring to the advertised speed’s by ISP’s I’m refering to the practical speeds that end users see when downloading files, it’s that simple, end of the day the speeds match up and are simply a difference between bits and bytes.
So you think that in the UK users actually get their full advertised speeds? Sure they get better speeds than us(the majority of content being local), but they still get no where near their advertised speeds on average. Observe:
Virgin Media Speed Comparison.
Trust me I understand about bits and bytes and have been working in IT for well over 15 years so I get the difference. The point I was making is they have better speeds than us and it can be translated into MB/s, I understand you have used the Australian equivalent of 3MB/s but no one really gets that over ADSL2+.. .My point was most people in Australia are under 1MB/s download speeds and download in the KB/s range and not MB/s that’s all I was saying back then.
And this is exactly what the NBN is trying to fix. It won’t be able to fix it completely because our biggest problem is a reliance on overseas content (and undersea cables are expensive) and the lack of local mirrors for content. The reason the majority of people get inadequate bandwidth however is still the fact they are using copper technology and we have long line lengths compared to the rest of the world because. In the UK for example their exchanges are very, very dense compared to ours. This means that ADSL2+ users will get a higher average bandwidth than we do.
What I’m trying to say is AS the NBN is going ahead now and funded by the tax payers I believe we (the taxpayers of the network) should at least have some say on some conditions for the network. I don’t believe they should get a free network build for them then be able to rip off the people that paid to build it by imposing limits that are not needed and due to their stinginess, they have already gotten/getting a free network build of which they should have paid for in the first place.
It is supported by tax payers, we are the security, in the same way you might get a business loan for your son or daughter and use your car as security. The business needs to pay for itself, and it can’t keep doing that if it gives away free services to mummy and daddy cause they put up the security.
I still believe we can’t get to the bottom of this, you firmly believe private sector will not implement a FTTH network were I believe it has to happen or a better plan could be put in place to encourage it.
You are not listening. I covered this in my last post, let me remind you:
I don’t think you understand the fundamental problem I am trying to highlight to you. You make it seem absolutist. The NBN, or no FTTH. It isn’t like that at all. We are talking about directly addressing a failed market here. A market that will be incapable of fixing itself over a reasonable timescale. And that’s key. If we wait for private enterprise to do it you will be waiting a very long time. Meanwhile we’ll fall more and more behind the developed world in terms of Broadband service. I think this is unacceptable for Australia, and we must be taking corrective action.
So stop putting words into my mouth please.
I honestly believe it would not take any longer than 10 years for us to get fibre in the major cities if the NBN was scrapped. Smarter ways to encourage privates to build these networks would be for the governments to offer tax incentives or programs like that… I don’t know the details and am not paid to come up with the idea’s either but I’m very confident major cities around Australia would get a FTTH network (it has to happen in time)
Finally you begin to present an alternative, and instead of discussing the alternative with us you have just said that “you are confident”.
I have offered suggestions what else could be looked into such as some of the articles I posted before (such as what Japans currently doing with their roll out) also the incentives for companies to build infrastructure or for governments to keep control of the build infrastructure and not sell if off so we the tax payer can benefit from it long term I think these are all suggestions I’ve offered so again don’t believe I’ve dismissed everything and believe I’ve offered alternatives that would be acceptable and fair to the opposite side.
Which comes back to again, I don’t think you understand the problem. Okay, l let’s look at those links you posted:
http://nationalbroadbandnetwork.net.au/2010/11/nbn-a-waste-of-money-japan-it-mogul/ – Ignoring the not very reputable nature of that site for a moment, that basic said the NBN roll-out method can work, but it doesn’t need to be government funded. So, that article is actually kinda useless. It’s just an attention grabbing title.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/nbns-opportunity-costs-mount-for-labo-evidence-mounts-that-the-numbers-dont-add-up/story-e6frg8zx-1226010343118 – This article does not present any alternative proposals and just highlights a few concerns with the NBN and if I’m honest doesn’t seem to be very well researched. Typical of the Australian.
http://www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/story/2011/02/21/nbn-network-is-rolling-out-waste-broadband/ –
One again, where is the alternative proposals? This article isn’t even against the NBN, it’s purely a politcal piece against Labor. The only thing it mentions related to the NBN is the supposed delayed Townsville roll-out because the cables were run via polls.
http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/378845/telstra_reveals_fibre-optic_plan_b/?fp=4&fpid=78268965 – We have discussed this “Plan B” at length before, and as I have tried to point out to you, it will likely be a FTTN technology of limited footprint, which means it does not address the core concerns of the NBN, nhy any Broadband Policy.
So where is your presented Alternatives?
I am not in blind support of the NBN, but I am yet to see a viable alternative. The problem I have with you is not that you disagree with me, a few people do and that is perfectly valid, it is that I have spent half my time explaining to you what the NBN is doing, and debunking some misinformation you have presented, rather than looking at the core issue. We have, after several thousand words, only just circled into what it is you think we should do instead.
@ Johnathan…
Here’s what you said…
Any way I give up
Any way I think that’s enough
Any way enough from me
That was about 10 comments ago…hmmm, curious!
Hahaha, Yes I think you are right RS, time to call is a day… Just kept getting replies so though it was only right I explained my self as I keep getting accused of ignoring comments or not explaining my self…
I think my point is across that I like the idea of a FC network just not at the taxpayers expense especially when we don’t have a surplus and need to borrow money to pay for it.
But agree I think this conversation can now come to an end and all can move to the Whirlpool forums to continue for many many years to come if they like.
Yes easy to get “caught up in the emotion”…!
Yip just ended it with the old NightKhaos :-) I think we’ve all had enough and it will never end (See post above) I disagree with the money being spent he does not that’s the end of it really.
Have a good weekend RS :-)
Thanks you, you too.
Ooh BTW – I agree with him…!
200th post… ;)
lol awesome :)
Comments are closed.