Turnbull rejects Kohler’s “pure fantasy” NBN analysis

119

news Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has sharply rejected a column by high-profile business commentator Alan Kohler this morning which argued the Coalition’s NBN policy as being “madness”, describing the Business Spectator founder’s words as “pure fantasy”.

In an article this morning entitled “The Coalition’s NBN policy is madness”, Kohler argued that the Coalition’s rival National Broadband Network policy was unworkable, as the Government’s existing fibre to the home-based NBN project would be too far advanced to stop before the next Federal Election and that the Coalition’s fibre to the node-based alternative would require negotiations with Telstra which would see the balance of power overwhelmingly shifted to Telstra’s side of the table.

“Don’t do it Malcolm. More importantly, don’t go into an election having promised to do it – you will soon find yourself in quicksand and eventually go down as the worst Communications Minister ever,” wrote Kohler.

In response, Turnbull published a statement on his site this morning entitled “Alan Kohler’s NBN fantasy”. Alan Kohler’s column today “The Coalition’s NBN policy is madness” is pure fantasy,” the Member for Wentworth wrote.

Turnbull pointed out that Kohler had predicted that by the time of the next election, the NBN would have “about a million” premises connected to its fibre to the home network. However, Turnbull said, NBN Co’s own corporate plan showed that there would be 54,000 premises in total connected to the NBN’s fibre by June 30, 2013, with only 341,000 premises passed.

“Even if he confused “connected” with “passed”, he is out by a factor of 3,” wrote Turnbull. “So where does the 1 million figure come from? Alan should explain it or publish a correction. He owes that to his readers, and of course to the shareholders of News International who just paid him $30 million for the Business Spectator. Further, it is far from certain that the 54,000 figure target will be met by June 30 next year – after all as at May 2012 the NBN Co had less than 4,000 premises connected to the FTTP network.”

According to NBN Co’s corporate plan (PDF, page 36), Turnbull is correct. By June 30, 2013, NBN Co is forecasting that it will have connected 286,000 premises in so-called ‘brownfields’ areas (where existing telecommunications infrastructure is available) and 55,000 in greenfields areas where it is not. The company estimates that by that date some 44,000 customers will be using the NBN’s fibre in brownfields areas, and some 10,000 on greenfields. However, NBN Co is also planning to have commenced construction to many hundreds of thousands of premises more by that stage — around a quarter of a million premises by the end of 2012, and more by mid-2013. By 2015, the company plans to have fibre under way to some 3.5 million premises in 1500 communities in every state and territory in Australia, according to its three year rollout plan.

Turnbull also took aim at Kohler’s claim that it would be difficult to reach an equitable agreement with Telstra over the Coalition’s rival NBN policy. “As far as Telstra is concerned a move to FTTN does not require major revisions to the deal with NBN Co (other than securing access to the D side copper) and would advantage Telstra because more customers would be switched over to the NBN network sooner and so the payments to Telstra would be accelerated with a consequent higher [net present value],” said Turnbull. “As an example BT in the UK passed 7 million households with its FTTN rollout in just the last year.”

Turnbull added that Kohler’s argument about a “two tier internet access regime” fundamentally misunderstood the nature of the Internet, “whose whole point is that it enables the propagation of signals over a range of networks and channels”.

“The Internet is a network of networks – fibre, copper (of many varieties), HFC, wireless, satellite – and it is that interoperability which is one of is greatest strengths. The issue for customers is not the particular medium of communication connecting their device to the Internet but rather the quality of the experience,” Turnbull wrote. “If bandwidth is sufficient for their needs, then whether it is on HFC or VDSL or GPON or wireless or a combination of some or all of them is not particularly relevant if it is relevant at all.”

“It has to be remembered that the speed of connection is determined by the slowest segment of the network between the customer’s device and the server with which they are connecting which in many cases may not even be in Australia.”

“And as for saying I should ensure the NBN is delivered “on budget” – if only there was a budget! The NBN Co has no budget. It has a project the scope of which was given them by the Government and they regularly provide estimates of what it will cost. There is no budget in the sense of a cap or ceiling on what they can spend. It is exactly like asking a builder to build you a house with no contract other than to pay him what it costs.”

opinion/analysis
So who’s right here, one of Australia’s most respected business and finance commentators, or one of Australia’s most respected politicians? It’s a Mexican standoff. Thankfully, we have an impartial adjudicator — yours truly ;)

In this case, if you examine the statements made by each side, the facts of the matter are that the arguments made by both sides are largely accurate, but neither tells the whole story.

Kohler is fundamentally correct that the Coalition’s alternative NBN vision would require a fundamentally risky and difficult reworking of the Government’s current NBN project. Yes, the NBN will be substantially advanced by the time of the next Federal Election. Yes, a new deal with Telstra will be tough. Yes, a combo FTTN/FTTH NBN rollout will result in a two-tier Internet access regime in Australia. These facts are all beyond dispute.

However, Kohler has probably exaggerated much of the risks in the Coalition’s NBN policy. For example, it is a fact that Telstra has stated it doesn’t see a reworking of its contract to be too big a deal, and it’s also a fact that the NBN’s schedule delay means the overwhelming majority of its network will not have been rolled out by the next election. In addition, if Turnbull is successful in delivering a nationwide FTTN network in a timely fashion, he will not be seen as Australia’s “worst Communications Minister ever”. Most Australians will probably be grudgingly happy (at least for a decade or so) with that result, delivering better broadband as it will.

Turnbull is also fundamentally correct in his assertions. Kohler probably wasn’t as precise as he could have been, in discussing the NBN’s rollout targets; Turnbull is correct that internationally, fibre to the node rollouts have been completed by companies like BT, and he is correct that the NBN’s budget is a movable beast and that many broadband customers don’t differentiate between technologies but between experiences.

However, Turnbull has probably exaggerated the simplicity of moving from a FTTH plan to a FTTN plan; he has completely ignored the fact that globally, most successful FTTN rollouts have been done by incumbent telcos, which wouldn’t be the case in Australia’s situation, and he has also ignored the fact that there is a huge qualitative difference between various broadband technologies (such as HFC and fibre), and that difference will only become more exaggerated over time as bandwidth needs increase.

I think this little skirmish between Kohler and Turnbull does much to illustrate the nebulous nature of much of the current NBN debate. By focusing on some key facts and omitting others, each side can easily make it appear as though they are the only ones in possession of the gospel truth. But the actual, objective truth is always a great deal more complicated, and usually incorporates aspects of both.

Perhaps my final comment on this issue would be that it’s not Alan Kohler’s responsibility to set national telecommunications policy, only to comment on it. But it very well may be Malcolm Turnbull’s, in about a year. However, Mr Turnbull has not yet disclosed key aspects of the Coalition’s rival NBN policy, and refuses to answer core questions about how it would function in the real world. This is objective truth. It is this fact which is behind much of the underlying tension in Kohler’s article. If Turnbull came clean on the Coalition’s policy, maybe he wouldn’t be constantly forced to defend its nebulous nature as he has done this morning.

Image credit: Office of Malcolm Turnbull

119 COMMENTS

  1. This coming from a man who won’t even detail “his plan”, won’t even detail the cost of “his plan”, and won’t even explain that the subsequent upgrade cost down the track that “his plan” will commit Australia to.

    You fail Malcolm. Fail hard.

  2. Kohler doesn’t say a million people “by the next election”. He says a million people but gives no time frame. Assuming the coalition wins govt, how many people (people, not premises) will be connected to the FTTH NBN after existing contracts have been fulfilled and the coalition has had a chance to ramp down the FTTH rollout?

    And I don’t think Telstra saying that reworking the contract wont be too big a deal is very good evidence against Kohler’s argument, given that Kohler is arguing that Telstra would be a big beneficiary and be in a position of negotiating power should the coalition win govt and switch to FTTN. Of course Telstra are going to talk in favour of their advantage, and play down the risks of the option that would deliver them more cash.

    I applaud your diplomatic and worthy preference to be impartial and seek the middle ground, but sometimes there is just one right side to a story.

    • The par from Kohler is as follows:

      “Also the NBN will be simply too far advanced: too many homes and businesses – about a million – will be connected to a FTTP, so that a change of tack to a cheaper FTTN network would either set up a two-tier internet access regime in Australia – some with fibre, some with copper – or require a massively expensive and pointless switch-over of a million homes from fibre back to copper. Debacle.”

      He is clearly talking about a timeframe around the next election.

      I’m sorry, but Turnbull is correct here. There will be nowhere near a million premises connected to the NBN by the time the next Federal Election hits.

      • We;ll have to agree to disagree Renai. In my view, Kohler is talking about the number of homes+businesses that will eventually be connected to FTTP even if the coalition changes course the day after the election. Turbull has already committed to honouring existing contracts, how many premises worth of contracts will be locked in by the time of the election next year?

        • I disagree too. The only relevant statement referring to the election, is in the opening paragrah.
          I will admit, it can be open to interpretation.

          Though, if contracts are honoured, Fibre to 1 million homes is easily feasible.
          aw

        • I’m sorry, but there is simply no evidence that there will be anywhere near a million premises connected to the NBN at any time close to the next Federal Election … if you have some evidence of that, I encourage you to present it.

          This debate really highlights the nebulous nature of the Government/NBN Co’s “premises under construction” figure, which does not give a realistic benchmark for how far the NBN has been rolled out. I’ve written on this before:

          http://delimiter.com.au/2012/08/15/premises-passed-the-only-useful-nbn-measurement/

          • The point is, it’s assumed that Kohler is referring to the election.
            When it can clearly be ‘interpreted’ that he isn’t necessarily.
            Read the article again.

          • Hi Renai, I think you are just ignoring what we are writing now, and continuing on by yourself with your argument. Last time I’ll say it for you: its not “by the next election”. Its the number of premises that will be connected should the coalition win govt. The coalition can’t stop construction overnight, there will be contracts in place to pass more homes well after the next election. unless they cancel contracts (which turnbull said he wouldn’t do) more homes are going to be passed after the next election, even if the coalition implements their policy from day 1.

          • I think the point being made is that while there won’t be anywhere near that done by the next election Turnbull has repeatedly said that he’ll let the contracts finish naturally. If this is the case then surely we can expect all of the “started” areas to be finished before any FTTN rollout starts. If ~1.3mill will be “completed or under construction” before the next election then I think it’s fairly safe to say that Turnbull will let these finish.

            There’s your million

          • But Renai, are we all not ADDING to its’ nebulous nature by, on your side, assuming he is speaking of the next election as the timeframe and, on our side, assume he is speaking regarding Turnbull’s promise to “allow all contracts through to completion”?

            THIS is the point. Turnbull has made the argument that there will NOT, by any stretch of the imagination, be 1 million people connected or even PASSED by the NBN by the next election….except that doesn’t matter because while the election is the POLITICAL turning point for the NBN, it is not the PHYSICAL turning point of the NBN. This point is the point at which NBNCo. will ACTUALLY stop rolling out fibre. And I believe you would be hard pressed Renai to convince ANYONE that would be November 4th 2013, the first weekday after the election….

            I’m sorry Renai, but Alan’s point is JUST as valid as Turnbull’s. BOTH might be nebulous, but they are BOTH as valid. IMO however, Alan makes the BETTER point because the Coalition do not have ultimate power over the NBN- it is legislated and therefore MUST pass through both houses to change substantially. Sure, Turnbull can direct NBNCo. to begin making plans to change to an FTTN, but, IF he holds to his word, that would not be before 2015 (after ALL contracts that will be remade at the end of this year run out) and if we look at the Corporate Plan for 2015, 1.3 Million will ACTUALLY be connected, with some 3.6 Million PASSED by that time.

          • Its the connected v commited argument again Renai – will The Government (whoever that is) be commited to 1 million FTTH come November 2013? If so, then Kohler’s claim also has legitimacy.

            The 3 year plan is all well and good, but several comments have suggested to me that any of those 3 year exchanges not yet started will be wound back to FttN. Ones underway will stay FttH. MT says they will honor contracts, but also said they will wind them back where they can, so the 3 year rollout isnt a guarantee you’ll get FttH.

            So it could be 1 million premises by Nov next year just for that reason alone.

          • Actually it isn’t GongGav.
            The error is in the assumption that Kohler is talking about the timeframe of the election.
            Which he either is, or isn’t.

            It can be interpreted either way.
            He is however, referring to premisis connected.
            aw

          • You keep putting words into Kohler’s mouth Renai, as is Malcolm. You can’t pretend he said something he didn’t unless you ask him directly if that is what he meant.

            I would have thought what Kohler is saying is worth debating. How exactly does the coalition do it’s CBA and draft a new plan and agreement before 1 million homes plus have been passed?

            As far as I can see they would literally have to blow construction contracts and down tools on existing rollouts to prevent the NBN hitting Kohler’s figure. It’s not like they can just alter course the instant the election is won, without serious repurcussions about costs to tax payers.

            As far as I can tell even Malcolm hasn’t claimed they’d cease the rollout…

          • hey guys,

            I acknowledged in the article that there would be hundreds of thousands more premises under construction by mid-2013 than just the 341,000 completed. And yes, Turnbull has acknowledged that the Coalition intends to honour the contracts that NBN Co has signed.

            However, the fact remains that Kohler’s “about a million” premises figure does not appear to have been sourced from any concrete document — it’s just a ballpark figure which he seems to have plucked from the air. In this context, Turnbull’s point about the NBN Co’s own targets from its corporate plan is legitimate.

            It should be easy to see that Turnbull here is providing evidence to back up his rollout figure claim — while Kohler is not. Sure, neither is telling the full story (as I noted), but Turnbull’s statement has some evidence basis, while Kohler does not back up his “about a million” figure with evidence.

            As most of you know by now, I am an evidence-based journalist. I encourage you to consider these facts carefully.

            Renai

          • Agreed.
            And the evidence is that Turnbull has stated that he won’t cancel contracts.
            And evidence observes, that if he doesn’t. 1 million + homes connected is feasible (though not an exact figure)
            And evidence observes, that Kohler’s article is open to interpretation.
            aw

          • The extent to which it is possible to know whether it is feasible is dependent on what NBN Co includes in its “passed or under construction” figure — the specifics of which we don’t know.

          • @Renai

            Hang on a minute, now we’re choosing WHICH facts to choose as “facts”?

            You’ve said Turnbull is more “factually accurate” in noting some 341 000 odd will ACTUALLY be passed by the election, as that is what the Corporate Plan says. And yet you say because Kohler’s “about a million” appears NOT to be based on factual evidence, it is not allowable?

            I’m sorry Renai, but BOTH Kohler’s numbers (which are NOT precise because it is ENTIRELY dependant on where the Coalition make the cutoff point to FTTH) AND Turnbull’s come from the same source- the Corporate Plan. It states 341 000 will be passed by June next year. And that 3.6 Million will be passed by 2015, the likely FACTUAL time the Coalition, IF they keep their word, will stop the FTTH rollout. You can’t pick and choose fats. Just because Turnbull has an PRECISE figure, doesn’t make it ACCURATE, just as Kohler’s “about a million” isn’t precise, but COULD be accurate, based on FACTS.

            I think we’re trying a little too hard here to say one is fact and the other isn’t. BOTH are based on a premise which may, or may not, come to pass- the Corporate Plan and contract lengths sustained. It is unfair to say either has more merit factually. Kohler’s MAY have less merit illustratively or journalistically because of his “vagueness” with numbers, but not factually- both 341 000 and “about a million” come direct from the Corporate Plan.

          • Total no of premises *connected* using FTTP, according to the NBN Co’s Corporate Plan, for FY2015 (ie till the current contracts finish) is 1.5 mln …

          • I think the point is that Turnbull has made a straw man argument. Kohler’s article is open to interpretation, and surely a common-sense interpretation is that he means the number of premises that will eventually get FTTP should the coalition win govt and change policy immediately.

            Turnbull makes a straw man by =assuming= he meant the number with FTTP connections by mid next year, and then attacks that straw man by correctly stating that there won’t be 1million premises with FTTP connections by mid next year.

          • I don’t see your problem. He doesn’t say next election. He talks about how many will be connected to FTTH while others are connected to FTTN. FTTN isn’t instantly rolled out at the time of the election so it’s pretty obvious he means the breakdown of technology available to Australians in the future. Most will have FTTN and a lucky few will have FTTH. This will do more than just give them a better connection, it will increase property values in those areas over the FTTN areas. That is unless the owner has paid the many thousands needed for the upgrade to FTTH (1000 pounds in the UK and likely to be more than the Aus dollar equivalent do to labour costs and greater distances).

          • “I don’t see your problem. He doesn’t say next election”

            Actually, in the paragraph directly prior to the “about a million” claim, he does refer to the next election:

            “Remember that one of the key reasons the government decided on a fibre to the premise network was advice that a FTTN would require compensation to Telstra of more than $20 billion. If the Coalition commits itself via an election promise to do that deal, then that would look like a bargain.”

            He also refers to “the election” and “an unbreakable election promise” earlier in the piece.

            Kohler clearly implies the timing of the Coalition taking control of the NBN is around the next election.

          • Renai writes:
            “Actually, in the paragraph directly prior to the “about a million” claim, he does refer to the next election:”

            Said paragraph:
            Remember that one of the key reasons the government decided on a fibre to the premise network was advice that a FTTN would require compensation to Telstra of more than $20 billion. If the Coalition commits itself via an election promise to do that deal, then that would look like a bargain.

            He refers to ‘election promise’.
            Not, as some are assuming, 1 million premisis connected at the time of the election.

            He then writes:

            Also the NBN will be simply too far advanced: too many homes and businesses – about a million – will be connected to a FTTP, so that a change of tack to a cheaper FTTN network would either set up a two-tier internet access regime in Australia – some with fibre, some with copper – or require a massively expensive and pointless switch-over of a million homes from fibre back to copper. Debacle.

            He refers to the time of ‘change of tact’

            This does not refer specifically, at the time of the election.
            Afterall, the coalition have stated doing a CBA first.
            And they have stated honouring contracts.

            Again, it is open to interpretation.

            Turnbull is able to interpret it to suit his agenda.
            And others, can interpret it to suit theirs.

          • “paragraph directly prior” It’s a good thing he started a new paragraph then isn’t it.

            If you take it that he means “at the next election” in this seperate paragraph what is this FTTN he is comparing it to? It doesn’t exist.

            I agree it’s bad that he didn’t make it clearer that he wasn’t talking about election time. I think though he was talking about the final mix of what people had access to. It does open it up to objections from people, yes. He should correct his number to election time if that’s what he meant or made it more obvious he meant the final mix of broadband that would result in a change to FTTN. Also he should add “assuming the Coalition keeps it promise to honour existing contracts”. “If the Coalition gets into power” isn’t necessary as it seems to be a preposumption of the entire article.

          • To be fair to Renai, Kohler’s article is open to interpretation.
            It can be interpreted either way.

            But if you look at the facts, governing what Turnbull has said, It’s highly likely that more than 1 million homes will be connected before anything would be able to switch to FTTN.

          • “It’s highly likely that more than 1 million homes will be connected before anything would be able to switch to FTTN.”

            That’s what I read as well…
            +1

          • “Premises under construction” is important because nobody is going to tell the workers to pack up and go home once construction is already underway.

            If one million are under construction, then one million will be completed even if it’s a year or so later.

        • Turnbull’s commitment to honouring contracts includes renegotiation. He may well be able to limit the roll out to distribution fibre only (ie. no more premises connected) whilst he changes the NBNCo’s focus to FTTN. I don’t believe the Coalition will connect any more premises to FTTP than the absolutely have to.

          btw, Renai, switching to FTTN+FTTP will give us a four-tier Internet access regime in Australia. We’re getting a three-tier access regime now.

      • Oh I took the “about a million” to be people, not actual premises…maybe a subeditor ate the “people” remark, which would make sense that 3-4 people per connection.

      • Renai, in all honesty you are being far to soft on MT, he has shown time and time again that he is willing to distort the truth to appear as tho he has a real alternative, when in reality his plan is to hold Australia back in the copper age!

        So much for the Coalitions grand claims of being the party that understands the needs of Aussie business!

  3. “Turnbull is correct. By June 30, 2013”

    No he isn’t – no-where in his article Kohler says ‘by the time of the next election’ – with the existing NBN contracts to be honoured, million is actually a rather conservative number. You’ve covered so many of Turnbull’s stuff and yet still fall for his lawyer-speak…

      • Either Turnbull is telling the truth that Coalition is committed to honouring the existing contracts or not. If he is, tell us what is your estimate of the number of premises that are going to be connected using FTTP under existing contracts ? Again 1 million is a conservative number…

  4. Kohlers comments reflect Turnbull’s previous statement, That they will honour NBN contracts.
    If they (coalition) do (if they win an election), 1million homes connected is totally feasible.

    And dare say, this is why Kohler commented as such.

    Cheers
    aw

  5. “As an example BT in the UK passed 7 million households with its FTTN rollout in just the last year.”

    Really you mean a project in full rollout mode with a population density about 3 times higher than here can rollout faster than here

    Lets bring that to a comparable number for a start pop density in london is 5.2 melbourne is 1.6 so first 7 million divided by the differance in density 2.1 million per year in a best case secnario for a city in australia if you take into account rural australia that number is much worse since our rural population is much more spread out than in the UK so using BT figures and applying them to Australia as a whole shows just how slow BT rollout actually is.

  6. It’s ironic that Turnbull keeps banging on about how it’s the performance that matters not the medium used to deliver it. He does that while simultaneously obsessing about how much better than FTTH anything other than FTTH is. He’s even got people like Don Randall standing behind him shouting that wireless is the solution and 12Mbps is enough for anyone.

    If you ask me the party of the “technology agnostic” approach is anything but.

    • Indeed, it is hard to be ‘technology agnostic’ when you are rejecting the best technology due to politically dogmatic grounds.

    • Yes, it’s funny that wireless is both the miracle technology that shows up urban fibre as an overengineered white elephant, and simply not good enough for the towns that won’t be getting that white elephant fibre rollout after all (the “1000 people” versus “1000 premises” flap from a few weeks back).

      Wireless broadband – it’s a dessert topping *and* a floor wax. It can be used to justify both sides of any NBN argument, as long as the wielder of its mighty power is a member of the Lib/Nat coalition.

  7. *insert obligatory Renai is a liberal stoog comment here* =P

    First of all i will admit my bias “for” the NBN because not only I do see it as a project worth doing but personal experience on how horribly imbalanced the Broadband landscape is in AU (and this is just a metro area! I would shudder at the stuff our country ppl have to deal with!). So I will tend to definitely lean on Kohler’s side of this argument

    *HOWEVER*

    Renai pretty much points out the biggest sticking point as to why such issues arise (and why I’m still sticking w/ Labor’s NBN) and that’s the fact that Liberals at this stage is just a “concept” or an “idea” of an alternative NBN. To call it a “plan” when they have presented nothing except vague suggestions and excessive use of the “cheaper and faster” slogan IMHO is misleading. A *plan* suggests a thought out, documented and open to scrutiny/amendments if need be. Coalition’s have *nothing* concrete to give us and if you’re looking at it from a “financial/business” perspective on fiscal responsibility it doesn’t make sense. You can argue all you want about how the existing plans may be flawed but the point is you *HAVE* an existing plan to criticise.. as opposed to a “concept” which at this point in time has no substance/costing/plans. And you are literally just going off the word of the opposition that they are by default ‘better’. Barring that fact that BOTH sides have had their share of cost blow outs!

  8. Turnbull’s comments here are vague and could be misleading. As some of Kohler’s are. However, this simply illustrates yet AGAIN Turnbull is not interested in discussing this policy of the Coalition’s. He is interested in sniping the NBN as much as possible and running on before anyone can turn and look. (Or, if you’re a Starcraft fan, Siege tank from high terrain…..)

    I have posted a refuting comment on his blog and will be doing so via Twitter also, but there is little point. Turnbull has now completely stopped engaging on the Coalition’s Broadband Policy. When was the last time you heard him on ANY interview or article ACTUALLY addressing details of the policy? It would’ve been around April/May, when he changed the policy direction FTTN officially and began to say that “we will complete the NBN objective”. Since then, nothing. Same rhetoric. Same ignorance of the disputed “facts” of his policy.

    This is another small nail in the coffin that bears my respect for Turnbull’s integrity as a politician :(

    • “Turnbull has now completely stopped engaging on the Coalition’s Broadband Policy. When was the last time you heard him on ANY interview or article ACTUALLY addressing details of the policy?”

      If he did that people would rightly start scrutinizing it. Abbott and his zoo crew chums cant have that. Best wait until they win an election, that way they can roll out their half arsed patchwork plan any way they like. Yes it is deceptive but as you know the coalition are notorious for this when it comes to the NBN.

  9. This is very, very sloppy work from Kohler, this is yet another example of a mainstream journalist – even a supposed business expert – jumping into the NBN debate with a loose regard to the facts.

    Where the hell does he get the 1 million homes connected figure from? Has he even read the NBN Corporate Plan released in the last fortnight?

    Sloppy, sloppy work.

    • He’s not sloppy until you or anyone can show how the NBN will NOT have 1 million homes connected to it before the Coalition switches to some other plan.

      • “He’s not sloppy until you or anyone can show how the NBN will NOT have 1 million homes connected to it before the Coalition switches to some other plan.”

        hey Brett,

        it’s fairly incredible to see you make this claim. NBN Co’s corporate plan clearly states there will be nowhere near a million premises connected to the NBN by the next election. That is the evidence Turnbull has put forward. Kohler has put forward zero evidence for his claim, and yet you state that it should be considered correct until proven otherwise?

        I’m sorry, but this is an irrational claim.

        Renai

        • @Renai

          You continually say there is no evidence for Kohler’s claims. There IS. The SAME evidence for Turnbull’s claims- the Corporate Plan. Turnbull uses the Election as the timeline. Kohler COULD be, but does NOT state this, you simply INTERPRET his article as such and by a DIFFERENT interpretation could be using the timeframe of when the Coalition could ACTUALLY change the NBN as his timeframe- ie mid-late 2014. By THAT timeframe, factually, FROM the Corporate Plan, there would be “about a million” premises connected.

          Is this vague journalism? Yes. Is it factually inaccurate? That is ENTIRELY dependent on your interpretation of it. After all, Kohler’s piece is an Opinion, NOT a news piece.

          • Mate,

            please stop talking in capital letters ;) It is rude.

            I agree Kohler’s article is subject to interpretation, but an interpretation of the Coalition starting to implement its NBN policy in mid to late 2014 isn’t really reasonable — the new Communications Minister would definitely have issued several directives to NBN Co by then.

            There is something which is starting to bother me about this thread. What bothers me is not the argument that Kohler’s “about a million” claim could be accurate. It is the implication that Turnbull’s own counter-argument could not possibly be right.

            To be objective, we need to consider both sides of this debate. Turnbull has presented evidence for his rollout stats, while Kohler has not. I think we need to be mindful of that — if we are not, then Delimiter has ceased to be an evidence-based forum, and I will not tolerate that.

            Renai

          • The arguments are both right:
            Turnbull is right that at the next election there will not be a million connections to FTTH.

            The question is however what the author meant?
            I don’t think it was.
            Why not ask him?

      • Brett, please go to pages 36-37 of the NBN Corporate Plan – all of this deployment information is quite clearly laid out there.

        If the Coalition do win power – and that is by no means certain given we are still at least 12 months away from an election – then Turnbull – as NBN shareholder minister – will get his first look at the deals the firm has signed with ALU and other vendors – that’s when he will be able to decide more fully about what path to take.

        My hunch is that Turnbull will probably put a hold on the current NBN deployment, conduct his much vaunted CBA and try to re-negotiate the existing contracts to do FTTN rather than FTTH as originally agreed under the current contracts.

        Given the fact that even the Chinese telecom equipment vendors like Huawei and ZTE are doing it tough I really don’t see any of the current western vendors with NBN contracts trying to play hardball in terms of re-negotiating deals.

        After all, under Turnbull’s FTTN model there will still be billions of dollars of business to be won, so there will still be jam on the table, just not as much as with the current model.

        • The corporate plan details 4 year construction contracts. If Malcolm ‘holds’ the project that’s as good as a break if they have to mothball a workforce. It’s not a matter of ‘if’ they would need to be compensated but by how much.

          Then he does his CBA and meanwhile instructs the NBN or bidders to submit plans for FTTN. Even if they have them lying around it’s not going to be that quick. It might be comparing apples with oranges but Telstra took 1 year to go from testing and planning to actually rolling out 4G to the capital cities, and then another 4 months to launch.

          A year is a long time sitting around doing nothing when people could have actually been connected in that time. Cost blowouts, delays? Oh the potential headlines….

  10. Hey everyone,

    Just a further quick comment regarding the “about a million” premises quote.

    Even if you assume Turnbull will honour six months of construction contracts for the NBN, this figure doesn’t really stack up.

    By June 30 2014, NBN Co’s corporate plan shows, it is slated to have deployed FTTH in brownfields to 1.1 million premises, with 178,000 additional greenfields premises.

    Let’s say the election happens in mid-2013, as most people expect it to. This means that NBN Co will by that stage have deployed some 341,000 total FTTH sites by that point, and will be planning to finalise some 966,000 over the twelve months following that date.

    Let’s say Turnbull lets the rollout continue in areas where it has commenced for six months following the election, taking us to about December 2013.

    If we guesstimate that about 1/2 of those premises slated to have been rolled out in the year to June 30, 2014 will actually be deployed (given the six month period), then we have about 483,000 premises. That, plus the 341,000 already done, gives us 824,000, which is quite short of a million.

    All of this speculation is drawn from page 35 of the latest NBN Corporate Plan.

    Now, to my mind this is a best case scenario. I can’t really imagine Turnbull allowing six months’ worth of construction to take place; in fact, he has pretty much pledged to stop it immediately, pending the completion of a cost/benefit analysis by the Productivity Commission. I envisage that the actual number of premises which would be completed would be much less.

    If the election takes place later in 2013, say closer to October, you would expect the rollout to have progressed further. If this is the case, and if Turnbull allows something like a six month window, the 1 million premises figure could be possible. But that’s assuming parameters which I would consider even beyond a normal best case scenario.

    Thanks for the discussion on this; I would welcome informed criticism and commentary on these stats. I just don’t believe, on the evidence I’ve seen, that Kohler’s “about a million” stat is anywhere near correct. But if you can prove me wrong to my satisfaction, then I’ll change my view on this.

    Cheers,

    Renai

    • @Renai

      I’m sorry Renai, but you’ve made ALOT of assumptions there:

      1- That the Election will happen June 2013- Why? Elections normally happen in November. You don’t believe Labor can hold on that long? Or you believe even if they can they’d go to an election early? Both are not facts

      2- Turnbull will only let 6 months contracts through. What evidence do you have for this? Turnbull has stated “we will not cancel NBN contracts”. Not “we will only cancel part of them”. IF he is true to his word, then those contracts would run to almost 2015, where, FACTUALLY, there will be MORE than “about a million” people connected.

      3- Now, to my mind this is a best case scenario. I can’t really imagine Turnbull allowing six months’ worth of construction to take place; in fact, he has pretty much pledged to stop it immediately, pending the completion of a cost/benefit analysis by the Productivity Commission. Actually, no. He has just stated that he will CONTINUE the rollout WHILE the CBA is being conducted. That he “will not delay the NBN any further and simply continue the rollout, modified and while doing so conduct a CBA and negotiations with Telstra”.

      I’m sorry Renai, but you’ve drawn an AWFUL lot of assumptions and presented them as facts here IMO. The FACTS we have are:

      1- AN election will happen in 2013. Elections NORMALLY happen in November. The only one that hasn’t in the last 20 years was the Gillard election and THAT was extenuating circumstances. Ipso facto, the election is likely in November 2013

      2- Turnbull has stated he “will not cancel NBN contracts”. IF we take him on his words AND the contracts are re-tendered in Decmeber this years, they will expire between December 2014 and June 2015. By that timeframe, according to the Corporate Plan, MORE than “about a million” premises will be connected.

      3- Turnbull CANNOT stop the rollout of the NBN immediately AFTER the election. He can direct them to begin changing their design and plans, but contracts do NOT simply get cancelled overnight and THAT is assuming he breaks his word (likely). It would take MONTHS minimum to stop the rollout “dead” WELL beyond the beginning of 2014 if the election is held in November, which is the MOST likely. Not to mention the legislation that needs to be passed to properly allow FTTN over FTTH AND the Telstra deal.

      • +1

        This is exactly why I have never been able to see the NBN being canned – only tweaked.

        There are the practical issues you have mentioned, but also the political ones.

        Are they really going to cancel existing scheduled rollouts to electorates? If I was a swinging coalition voter who has their scheduled rollout cancelled – am I really going to thank Malcolm Turnbull?? Why the hell would you risk a backlash on a project that doesn’t impact the budget, and is supported by nearly half your own base??

        Support for the NBN will likely be 60%+ once the coalition wins office since at least 10% of voters believe the coalition will manage it better. Why would you buck this??

        Malcolm says: “As far as Telstra is concerned a move to FTTN does not require major revisions to the deal with NBN Co (other than securing access to the D side copper)”. Which is it? Does it not require major revisions? or is securing access to the copper a major revision?

        How much public monies will it require to turn the titanic? Changing to FTTN doesn’t come free in the short term even if it saves some money long term. Is there really going to be no scrutiny or comparison to the NBN once they get into office?

        In the likely outcome that the Coalition don’t control the senate who is going to force Telstra to agree to their terms? In the event they go to a double dissolution the ever reliable Antony Green predicts: “One other point to make is that if the Labor government makes it through to the end of its term in the second half of 2013 and the Coalition won that election, then the Coalition would probably find it impossible to hold a double dissolution until the first half of 2015”

        In the event that the Coalition gift Telstra an offer they can’t refuse surely Optus and every other telco is not going to stand idly by while competition goes back 10 years.

        Are businesses like the AFL who want multi-casting to leverage their content deals really going to passively sit and see their bargaining power with Foxtel and FTA shrunk by an arbitrary switch to FTTN?

        There are a lot of questions which we don’t have good answers for – and I think Alan’s article ignites the fuse for other people to ask them.

        • Good stuff Brett,

          Late next year is going to be an exciting time. Lots of competing interests involved and none of them keen to let others get a free ride (except the Libs to Telstra).

          My main frustration with the politics of NBN until now is how people get caught on a few details when the project is a big picture item. Having lived and worked in rural Australia for many years I am desperately aware of the need for improved infrastructure. I’ve heard politicians BS about many things relating to telecommunications and then you get the reality of Telstra and it sucks. It’s not just a personal feeling of sucking. It’s wasted opportunities, fewer jobs, towns that come so close to offering a compelling lifestyle but lack decent communications. I say it as a matter of faith but if you put fibre into the hands of rural Australian towns (above 1000 premises of course) you will get cooperation in educational developments that bring standards right up, there will be a massive demand for specialists to consult using video conferencing. The applications that we could develop in driving service delivery productivity is something that the rest of the world will demand when they can finally afford to do their own NBN’s, which they will eventually. None of this is to mention industry. Some of our best small-medium business innovation happens in the country (look up FT Industrial as an example http://www.ftindustrial.com/who-is-ftt.html). Incredibly bright people that use whatever is at their disposal to do something better. Engineers with good communications are much more productive.

          As much as I wish we could have a French style revolution on Labor, the Liberals are so short sighted in their approach it is simply incredulous.

          Sorry for ranting, I feel better now.

      • There are some extra FTTH connections to factor in. Greenfields. The Coalition still plan to roll FTTH out there.

    • +1

      While I believe the 1 million mark is more than possible, its a very debatable number either way. MT is using a worst case scenario, whats wrong with a best case scenario?

      And a best case scenario has 3.5m premises commited to over 3 years.

      Like you, I expect LNP to halt construction if/when they win next year, but I cant see them altering construction in progress. The result of doing that will be a catastrophic cost blowout, potentially needing to rip up recently rolled out FttH infrastructure, for no gain.

      Whats the alternative? Have fibre laid out to the home for half a street/suburb/exchange, and just to a node for the other half? Political suicide, and a large part of their switch to “we will complete the NBN objective” a few months back.

      Its that logic that makes me believe 1 million isnt a huge stretch – any exchange started by the election will be commited to being FttH, and hence count towards Kohlers claim. I’m trained to be a glass half full person when it comes to my reporting. We wanted reports to be as positive as they could be.

      MT is using a right here, right now debate which is misleading and deceptive – where’s the validity of focussing on numbers that will be irrelevant by the time the important timeframe comes about? Its something that could be debated in your other thread of today.

      Certainly managed to raise some contentious topics today Renai :)

  11. In his comments on his own blog, Malcolm is still saying the date for the disputed million is the day government changes hands despite his oft repeated promise to deliver THE NBN and honour all contracts. His tendency to lawyer style hair splitting reminds me of John Howard’s approach to his promises. Credibility under stress.

  12. Hey everyone,

    FYI I have emailed Kohler to ask him what the “about a million” comment is based on. Hopefully he’ll clarify the matter :)

    Renai

    • Probably a good start. But Kohler should have clarified before he hit the publish button.

      It could be said that you should have done the same. But I won’t hold it against you, as it is, open to interpretation.
      And Turnbull has done just that, to support his adgena.

      My only possible critisim here, is that, this should have been more illustrated in your piece.
      Again, it was an easy thing to overlook, and the comments more than show the other side.

      Also see comments here:
      http://whrl.pl/RdhVRM

      Cheers
      aw

      • EDIT: Link doesn’t work – as follows:

        Alan Kohler is a journalist. His job? sell stuff.
        How do you do that? Create controversy. (ie every movie/book/show, has conflict).

        Read the article.
        Read the responses.

        Objective – Achieved….. :-)

  13. If anyone on here seriously thinks that Malcolm Turnbull and the Liberal Party are only going to “tweak” the current NBN model then they are kidding themselves.

    The current NBN model is the antithesis of current Liberal Party philosophy and in the current financial environment is never, ever going to pass muster with the people pulling the strings in the Liberal Party.

    As far as the Liberal Party is concerned the current NBN is a state-owned, monopolistic nightmare which should have been left behind in the 1980’s, they have no wish to return to that kind of operation.

    If the Coalition win the election then the current NBN is off the table.

    • While I agree, I think they’re going to be pidgeon-holed into doing the original plan.

      On the merits that Telstra are NOT going to play fair. They have no interest in a changed plan, they have no interest in a restructured NBN and have nothing to gain from it other than possible income from a very stupid LNP alternative. They must be rubbing their hands together with glee because if the LNP are determined to change the plan, they’re going to screw the LNP into the ground.

      The real question is if they’ll be ‘man enough’ to swallow their pride.

      • Under Thodey Telstra are an eminently different company to the shambles they were under Trujillo.

        Thodey knows how much damage was done by Trujillo extending the middle finger to successive governments so will try and accomodate the incoming government wherever possible.

        Whatever happens Telstra wins anyway, that much is for sure.

  14. I agree with most of what you said. I read the Business Spectator Article this morning and it was a brilliant read. While it did have a kink here and there, on the whole hes on the money.

    Renai again follows my view, I agree with him here whole heartedly.

    What I would say to Mr Turnbull – and again the only thing he doesnt understand:

    “If the internet is adequate for you now, doesnt mean its adequate for the Australian next to you. This is the fundamental difference in policy”

    He may not see the reasoning on that point now, come election – and a possible loss – I’d hope he gets it and changes his tune.

  15. hey everyone,

    FYI I just received a response from Kohler on this one. He is planning a fuller response tomorrow morning going into some of this in more detail, but in brief he confirmed the speculation that the one million figure was drawn from the number of premises commenced or passed — as the Coalition has promised to fulfil existing contracts. He’s also working from the Corporate Plan.

    There have been some very interesting reader comments on this this morning and afternoon. So far I still maintain that Turnbull has the edge on this one — given that the Coalition will be the ones who will decide to what extent these contracts are honoured. I don’t think it’s as simple as stating that the Coalition will continue construction where it has been started — and I certainly don’t expect the Coalition to continue to construct the NBN out to FY2015 as some have suggested.

    However, I’m keeping an open mind and looking forward to further commentary on the issue.

    Renai

    • First of all, thanks for contacting Kohler – I think he needs to be mindful how what he says can be re-interpreted, especially by someone like Turnbull given the verbal ‘flexibility’ as to semantics ( it’s just days,since he talked about FTTP being ‘effectively’ the same thing as FTTN).

      “So far I still maintain that Turnbull has the edge on this one — given that the Coalition will be the ones who will decide to what extent these contracts are honoured. ”

      That’s a different issue – Kohler (or we) can only go by what Turnbull publicly now says – most of the current contracts cover the current 3 year rollout. Turnbull promised to keep them. Of course, if they win elections, they, they have an ‘edge’ and can break that promise…

    • Sorry, off topic…

      but +1 for an excellent example of what modern journalism can and should be. Write article, engage with readers in a meaningful fashion, actually contact sources for further information and keep the story updated.

    • “So far I still maintain that Turnbull has the edge on this one — given that the Coalition will be the ones who will decide to what extent these contracts are honoured. I don’t think it’s as simple as stating that the Coalition will continue construction where it has been started — and I certainly don’t expect the Coalition to continue to construct the NBN out to FY2015 as some have suggested.”

      What do you expect to happen in this situation Renai? I’d genuinely like to know what the Coalition’s options are with those contracts. Would they be able to pay them out and build FTTN in those areas and still come out ahead? Because I don’t think think it would make sense to do that unless there were substantial savings involved. So how much would putting FTTN in those areas instead of FTTH actually save once contracts are in place? According to Alan Kohler’s interview with Mike Quiqley on Inside Business a couple of weeks ago (see last two paragraphs at the end: http://www.abc.net.au/insidebusiness/content/2011/s3568518.htm) NBNCo have tried to leave a lot of flexibility in their agreements, but Quigley didn’t really go into detail about what that means.

      • We’re talking about contracts worth in the hundreds of millions to billions of dollars. In these sorts of situations, they can usually be renegotiated. Turnbull still needs someone to build a FTTN network, after all — I would anticipate the contracts would be reworked along these lines.

        It’s not realistic that the contracts would simply be honoured and FTTH continued to be rolled out for several years after the Coalition takes office. The contractors know this. Everyone involved in the process does.

        • But the contractors aren’t the only ones involved. There is also the oft repeated statement that the existing contracts will be honoured. Voters in the relevant electorates will not be impressed if the contracts are not performed.

          And while the contractors will be looking for more business, a new government will need them to deliver on plan B. They will be negotiating from a position of strength while being wary of signing any deal with a mob given to moving the goal posts if not the boundaries of the playing field.

        • So, “honouring” contracts does not preclude substantially altering the work that will be performed. Thanks for decoding that for me, Renai. It’s quite difficult to know what a politician means when they say something, as a lot of the time they are happy for you to misinterpret them if it might benefit them at the ballot box. I guess the only guaranteed installations of FTTH will be those areas that are actually completed come the election.

  16. In his blog entry, MT says “would advantage Telstra because more customers would be switched over to the NBN network sooner and so the payments to Telstra would be accelerated with a consequent higher NPV”.

    Instead of interminably discussing the timing of million figure with little chance of the issue being resolved, wouldn’t it be better to discuss the use of “THE NBN” as a synonym for a broadband network? Also, given the name of the company delivering THE NBN is NBNCo, is it not important to stress and re-stress the words are not interchangeable?

    The issue can easily be overlooked by the great majority who have a life and don’t examine these issues in such minute detail. I suspect MT directs most of his sound bites to that audience.

    As to not continuing the construction out to 2015, has MT qualified his “honour the contracts” promise or do you expect the promise to be broken? It has been in writing has it not?

    • “would advantage Telstra because more customers would be switched over to the NBN network sooner and so the payments to Telstra would be accelerated with a consequent higher NPV”

      Know what else would advantage Telstra? locking everyone in to paying 10 dollars per month to maintain the copper, and paying for the privilege.

      Seriously; even if we didn’t have to change a single cent of the transition to using Telstras ducts, pits, exchanges and other stuff. We would be left with a network that has a bunch of Telstra copper that would need renting still.
      So, we now have 24 dollars per month NBNco rent for our fibre component, we also have 10 dollars (increasing over time as the copper network degrades) to pay to Telstra for the use of their copper.

      We get to have the same fun game of pass the parcel when you have connection issues:
      “FTTNCo! my vdsl is slow”
      FTTNCo: “call Telstra”
      Telstra: “Call NBNco”

      Again I find myself making stuff up. Please someone in the liberal party, give me your NBN plan! I’ll take the one on the back of a napkin if I have to!

  17. As several of us have pointed out, the balance of probability is very much that Kohler will be proved right.

    Some people are getting excited about what will be in place on the day when the election occurs, but that’s not the relevant point to determine how many people will FINISH UP getting NBN after the Coalition aborts all future contracts post-election.

    By the time all the existing contracts at that time have been fulfilled, there should be about a million premises involved. A fact which makes the Coalition waffle alternative look even more redundant and unacceptable.

    • Particularly if they have switched on the gigabit plans by that time, in which case the 30-40mb that most people will be getting under FTTN will really seem poor in contrast.

      • “Particularly if they have switched on the gigabit plans by that time, in which case the 30-40mb that most people will be getting under FTTN will really seem poor in contrast.”

        IIRC that’s not due to 2014, but yes, you make a very interesting point.

    • “By the time all the existing contracts at that time have been fulfilled, there should be about a million premises involved.”

      We don’t know that, but I really doubt the Coalition is going to honour all current NBN construction contracts up to 2015 … anyone who thinks these contracts will not be renegotiated to focus on FTTN instead is naive indeed. When you’re talking about billion dollar contracts, truly everything is up for negotiation.

      • Renai, you say ‘We don’t know that, but I really doubt the Coalition is going to honour all current NBN construction contracts up to 2015 … anyone who thinks these contracts will not be renegotiated to focus on FTTN instead is naive indeed. When you’re talking about billion dollar contracts, truly everything is up for negotiation.’

        We know about politicians’ promises, but Turnbull has said (with unusual clarity) that the Coalition will not cancel any existing NBN contracts when they take office. I may be ‘naive indeed’, but I can’t see how even a politician could pretend that there is any way, technically or legally, that a signed and operational contract for specific FTTP supply and construction could be magically turned into a contract for a completely different system.

        And anyone who wants to negotiate re a billion dollar contract had better remember that the time for negotiation is before the deal is signed. Once it’s a contract, it’s a contract, which Malcolm Turnbull would have been aware of when he said they would not attempt to abrogate existing contracts.

        • Malcolm says he is going to honour existing contracts. Renai says he is going to re-negotiate them.

          Why not add this question to the list Malcolm has promised to answer?

          Perhaps the IT journalists would be less critical if Malcolm were more forthcoming on the tedious questions the IT folk (unlike the average mainstream journalists) persist in asking.

  18. I just thought I’d add my two bob’s worth. I listen to Alan Kohler on Inside Business and in the past whenever I’ve heard him talk about the NBN he’s been pretty critical.

    Only a week ago he was referring critically to cost blowouts and delays.

    I don’t think he’s neccessarily a huge supporter of the NBN but rather thinks that it’s come to far to stop now. Just as the rollout is about to gain momentum and all the early obstacles have been overcome after years of groundwork have been laid the coalition seems intent on pulling the rug and going back to square zero.

    • I also think it’s come too far to stop. In fact, I made the point to Turnbull personally when he was first appointed Shadow Comms Minister that there would come a time when the NBN would be too far rolled out to stop, and challenged him as to what his plan was to deal with that. That issue has never left the Coalition; it has never dealt with it.

  19. FFS guys….

    For how long have we been complaining about mainstream media being blatantly and baselessly against the NBN and Renai the only beacon of light in a mire of shit, by fact checking.

    Now we have Alan Kohler at last siding with the NBN and seeing what a joke the Turnbull plan is and what do you guys do, bag Renai because he’s simply again doing what Renai does, fact checking…

    Seriously :-(

      • IMO Indeed they do socrates, no doubt and overwhelmingly so..

        As such, it just proves there’s no need for anyone on the pro NBN side to exaggerate the NBN’s plusses, because the facts are already on the pro NBN side…

        Let’s leave the exaggerations (plus FUD and bullshit of course) to the nay sayers, as they have nothing else ;-)

    • I have run up against this problem many times in my career.

      If you have a run of pro-NBN stories based on facts, people assume you are pro-NBN and get all outraged when you run a story criticising the NBN, even if it’s also backed up by facts.

      Then six months later, after a run of anti-NBN stories based on facts, people start to assume that you are anti-NBN, and get all outraged when you run a story backing the NBN, even if it’s also backed up by facts.

      People don’t seem to understand that I don’t have a pro- or anti-anything agenda on Delimiter, apart from a dedication to truth and the furtherance of Australia to become a better place for all concerned.

      The media should be a check and balance on *all* forms of power, not just those held by one faction. For the same reason, I hate it when people with an obvious agenda of some kind comment on Delimiter. I want the audience to predominantly be open-minded people who focus on facts and evidence, not dogma.

      • I too want “Australia to become a better place for all concerned” Renai…

        Which is the sole reason I support the NBN :-)

  20. 1. We don’t know the date of the next election, so anything depending on knowing that will be necessarily fuzzy.

    2. Using the new “build drop” approach as a guide, one may legitimately treat “premises passed” and “premises connected” as effectively the same, since a fibre will actually terminate on the outside wall of the building, whether or not an active service is being provided.

    3. Taking the common assumption that the election will take place around October-November 2013, we have two relevant figures to play with when it comes to FTTP premises passed:
    FY2013 (ie 30 Jun 2013) – 341,000
    FY2014 (ie 30 Jun 2014) – 1,307,000 [p37 of 2012-15 Corporate Plan]
    One could throw a veil of vagueness over this and make the very general statement that “a million premises will be passed during the same financial year as the likely date of the election,” and one would be perfectly correct in doing so.

    4. It is possible to extrapolate a closer approximation to determine the date when a million premises will be passed, based on the daily run rates on p37. By very rough reckoning, this million-premises target will be reached around MID-FEBRUARY 2014, which is around 3 months AFTER the election, and around the time the new Parliament will first sit.

    So, if Alan Kohler wished to be taken literally, he is still only about three months out. Not a very big deal, and it hardly justifies Malcolm Turnbull’s trombone solo of discontent.

    • Come off it.

      The protests of the pro-NBN commentators on this thread are getting unbelievable.

      “One could throw a veil of vagueness over this and make the very general statement that “a million premises will be passed during the same financial year as the likely date of the election,” and one would be perfectly correct in doing so.”

      Yes … but that’s not what Kohler said in his commentary at all, and not what Turnbull responded to. “In the same financial year as the likely date of the election”? It’s this kind of vagueness which frustrates me when talking to people who have thrown all critical reasoning skills out the door due to being in love with the NBN.

      Kohler’s article referred directly to the next Federal Election and not to “the same financial year”.

      “Taking the common assumption that the election will take place around October-November 2013”

      Another colossal assumption. What if it’s held in August?

      I’m sorry, but there is just no evidence that there will be a million premises connected to the NBN by the time the next election rolls around. The Corporate Plan does not show that, and comments to the contrary continue to be excessively optimistic, continually taking the absolute best case scenario — not the best idea for this kind of huge infrastructure project.

      Gwyntaglaw, in your own comment you acknowledge that we can’t make these predictions as we don’t know the date of the next election. And yet in the very same comment, you claim that the million premises figure will be reached three months after the election.

      This is pie in the sky speculation at its most extreme.

      • Renai, I can see you’ve had your work cut out for you responding to this issue. But I think you’ve misunderstood my purpose in writing.

        I was not attempting to fog the debate or mislead as to the actual statements made by Alan Kohler.

        I was simply trying to go back to the facts, amidst volleys of wildly varying claims and counter-claims, and trying to construct logically and without passion a position that is justified by the known facts.

        In particular, you have seized on my cautious (and entirely defensible) statement about the uncertainty of an election, the date of which has not been fixed, and used that to dismiss any subsequent statements. And this without recognising that if my statements are rendered meaningless by this acknowledged uncertainty, then ALL statements of any kind which turn on the election date, including all statements made by Messrs Kohler and Turnbull, are equally to be ignored.

        In any event, I trust that Alan Kohler will be able to shed further light and knowledge on the intent of his claims tomorrow. I await that with interest.

  21. Let’s give the Coalition the benefit of the doubt here. Let’s assume that they can deliver FTTN (or equivalent) to 90% of the population by 2017. Let’s also assume they can do it for $20 billion. Let’s also assume that they have some plan to actually make a return on that $20B and aren’t just planning to throw it at Telstra and Optus.

    Even given all of the above, why would you bother when for twice the cost and couple of years extra, you get a network that’ll last ten times longer, is a hundred times faster, and actually delivers ubiquitous broadband to a greater percentage of the population (and not the “pot luck” access you get with FTTN and/or HFC, where the actual quality of your connection is arbitrarily determined by how far you are from the node or how many others are online at the same time as you)?

    To be perfectly honest, I’m starting to think that if the Coalition gets into power at the next election, I’d prefer they did absolutely nothing rather than wasting billions on such a half-arsed plan.

    I don’t understand why the Coalition gets free reign to nitpick people’s critique of their “plan” when all we have to work off of are assumptions and vague promises from them anyway.

    • “I don’t understand why the Coalition gets free reign to nitpick people’s critique of their “plan” when all we have to work off of are assumptions and vague promises from them anyway.”

      This. +10,000,000,000

  22. I have a question, if HFC is available, will Malcolm install his FTTN in the same area?
    Simple question….

    Going by the sounds of it, he basically wants to keep the cable networks, and those that can only get adsl will get FTTN, and those on the farms and outer get crappy wireless.

    I don’t see that as a “fair, equal and more importantly national” network. I see that as a patch job with no scope for future upgrades and varying qualities of services which are sure to frustrate everyone whilst keeping Telstra the monopoly of that last piece of copper, along with that piece of copper limiting your connection speed.

    Bring on Labors NBN FTTH to 93% of the population please.

    I don’t understand how the Liberal party can be so against FTTH, we all know that is the future and the most cost effective way to easily and quickly upgrade the network to faster speeds, along with the fact Labor’s network is an investment to recoup the expense of the network and then continue to generate a return on investment, Liberals is not, I think that important information gets left out a lot, and is definitely not easily or clearly stated.

    Liberals POV seems to just be, your spending “x amount” when I can do the same thing for 3x’s less (what a waste etc). The issue is….

    A. Its not the same thing.
    B. Whilst their plan is less $, it doesn’t recoup the cost of building FTTN or generate a ROI.

    Terrible Malcolm

    • “I have a question, if HFC is available, will Malcolm install his FTTN in the same area?
      Simple question….”

      Good question. On the one hand the coaltion are adamant that infrastructure competition is of paramount importance and on the other they must “stop the waste”. So which way will they flop? Who knows? The real goal here is to keep everyone in the dark about their “broadband” plan and they are doing a very good job of it seems…

  23. What I find interesting is that Turnbull is winning by being vague. Many discussions on the site and others are largely fueled by speculation. It nearly impossible to predict with accuracy what is going to happen should the coalition win the next election.

    It is often impossible to predict what politicians of all persuasions will do once the election is won. It has become a tradition in Australian politics for the opposition to reveal little until the last minute to avoid scrutiny. It will happen again next time.

    Will the coalition follows MT (respect contract) or TA (we don’t need it) pronouncements? Will the NBN, as we know it, change much? If so, how long will it take to change? What will be the cost or time table? Who knows? Meanwhile, we argue who’s right, who’s more factual? Given that there is nothing to compare, how can we know?

    Ironically, Turnbull knows better than we do how many premises will be passed and he does not even need the NBN corporate plan to work it out. Will he tell us before the election? Would anyone bet their house on it?

  24. Interestingly this discussion and item is over MT’s responce, but there has been no comment on the fact that that response was only of one aspect of Alans article.
    No response to this realistically at all.

    ” What’s more, FTTN would require cabinets the size of big wardrobes on nature strips; NBN Co is already having enough trouble getting neighbourhood and planning approval for its small knee-high pillars. Erecting wardrobes on a whole lot of peoples’ nature strips would be another debacle.

    And the final problem is that the NBN is a mechanism for subsidising regional and rural broadband, since fibre will go to 93 per cent of all Australian homes and the rest will get fast wireless, and country towns will pay the same price as the city.

    Is the Liberal National Party really going to end that subsidy and tell country towns that their fibre can’t be afforded and they have to stay with copper? Or even worse, is it going to expose to true cost of it to the rest of us? I don’t think so.’

    Plus MT has made a statement

    “The issue for customers is not the particular medium of communication connecting their device to the internet but rather the quality of the experience. If bandwidth is sufficient for their needs, then whether it is on HFC or VDSL or GPON or wireless or a combination of some or all of them is not particularly relevant if it is relevant at all.”

    Reiterating ” If bandwidth is sufficient for their needs,”.

    This does not address upload as such and assumes
    a) Current requirements are the end story
    b) Whatever the medium you are stuck with will be satisfactory

    • “…no comment on the fact that that response was only of one aspect of Alans article.”

      Hear! Hear! This discussion, like others, has spent too long discussing a transitory issue of semantics instead of concentrating on the main issues. Are there too many frustrated lawyers following these messages?

      Then again, the main issues of FTTN vs FTTP have already been discussed to death in many fora. It’s time to start installing cables.

  25. Renai, I have apparently given you cause for consternation. I am sorry. I was sincerely attempting to add to the light, not heat, of the conversation. If I have failed to do that, then I will have to try harder.

    But I do wonder if you have me confused with someone else. I did not immediately jump to Alan Kohler’s defence. I was, in fact, rather late to the party: the first of only two posts by me (prior to this) was made at 6:17pm.

    And in fact, I did not simply defend his claim at all. I pointed out that even on a generous interpretation of estimated NBN rollout progress, he was certainly wrong – if not as wildly wrong as Malcolm Turnbull has claimed.

    I can assure you that I had read all three pieces carefully before commenting (Kohler’s, Turnbull’s and yours). Turning to the original article, I note that Alan Kohler wrote the following (paragraph quoted in full):

    “Also the NBN will be simply too far advanced: too many homes and businesses – about a million – will be connected to a FTTP, so that a change of tack to a cheaper FTTN network would either set up a two-tier internet access regime in Australia – some with fibre, some with copper – or require a massively expensive and pointless switch-over of a million homes from fibre back to copper. Debacle.”

    Thereare several problems raised by this paragraph. One is that the timeframe is vague. The context of the paragraph within the article suggests to my reading that Kohler is talking about the general time of the federal election, or its immediate aftermath. But he could have in mind a more generalised post-election period in mind. Without clarification, arguments can go round in circles on this point.

    Another problem is the question of what is meant by “connected”. I exchanged a couple tweets with Malcolm Turnbull, in which he asserted: “@Gwyntaglaw big difference between passed and connected”. My reply: “@TurnbullMalcolm With the “build drop” practice, not a big difference. Fibre reaches outer wall of premises- only requires techie to add NTU”. Again, without clear definitions, it is easy to talk at crossed purposes, and to little avail.

    The suggestion in Kohler’s paragraph that a million homes would be switched back from fibre to copper is just as much a straw man as the “rip up the fibre!” scare that the PM and Minister Conroy unwisely used a while back. But that is not really the main point, anyway.

    A further argument could be that Kohler was referring not only to NBN FTTP in his total, but also existing commercial fibre used now by thousands of businesses. I’m not suggesting that is what he did necessarily mean by his “about a million” estimate, but in the interests of exploring the ambiguities in the statement, it couldn’t be wholly dismissed.

    Now, looking at Malcolm Turnbull’s piece, it essentially boils down to the following points:
    1. The rollout numbers are wrong
    2. The switchover to FTTN is not as big a deal as Kohler has suggested
    3. An extended quibble over the phrase “two tier internet access regime”, in which Turnbull lectures Kohler about the interoperability of the Internet over multiple technologies, but which misses Kohler’s real point that the result will be a two tier split between high capacity FTTP and significantly lower capacity FTTN

    Turnbull focuses almost entirely on the projected premises passed at 30 June 2013. You agree with this – unarguably, because it is what the Corporate Plan in fact says. So why my quibble, and why do I now return to the points I first made at 6:17pm?

    Not just because picking that date as the effective election date (or date at which the government were to change) is as arbitrary as any other; but because it completely avoids discussing one very important set of figures that almost no one has alluded to: the staggering increase in the tempo of the rollout that will be happening at that point in the rollout.

    Let me quote from the Corporate Plan the brownfield premises passed daily run rate (based on 250 working days/year) [p37]:
    1 Jul 2011 – 30 Jun 2012: 42
    1 Jul 2012 – 30 Jun 2013: 1,028
    1 Jul 2013 – 30 Jun 2014: 3,372

    The first figure, only 42 premises passed per day, is what Malcolm Turnbull refers to by his colourful phrase invoking the speed “of an arthritic snail”. Fair enough, if you expect the rollout to come charging out the barn door from day one. But unfair if you take the broader view, perhaps, of an immense project that requires a little more caution and careful planning in the early stages of allocating resources.

    The second figure describes the average run rate closer to where we are now. Picking up speed, but by no means setting records.

    The third figure, however, is where things start to get interesting. If the Government goes full term, this is where we will be at the time of the election and its aftermath. The average rate of 3,372 premises passed per day is dramatically faster, and getting much closer to the peak rollout rate of 5,542, which is to be reached the following year (2014-15).

    My own calculations, however crudely estimated or clumsily expressed, were nothing more than an attempt to capture this fact. With every passing month during the 2013-14 year, an average of around 70,000 additional brownfields premises will be passed ( which includes, of course, the fibre drop to the outside wall of the premises).

    That’s a pretty significant pace. And it doesn’t even included greenfields rollout ( which is driven more by housing demand, and has thus been much harder to predict).

    I don’t know if Alan Kohler was thinking more broadly about build starts rather than completed rollouts. And the figure of “about a million” is open to challenge on several fronts. But I have attempted to give some flesh to an argument that he is not as far out as Mr Turnbull would suggest – and I also strongly suggest that Turnbull’s June 2013 figure is not the only metric worthy of consideration.

    Facts, Renai. I’m only interested in the facts.

    • So looking at the numbers stated for rollout, theres circa 400k for this financial year. In the 100 days after 1 July 2013, another 400k gets rolled out. That’s very much in the timeframe of next years election – early October.

      Toss in another month after the election before anything is done, and you have another 100k. Suddenly, the ‘about 1 million’ figure isnt all that far off. MT wont stop the NBN rollout on day 1, its just not practical.

      Election happens July as Renai suggests (and this IS possible), then there are several hundred thousand premises not yet passed. Fair enough. But pretty much every suggestion I’ve seen has been for an October/November election. Those extra 4 or 5 months could be very important for the NBN, with 100k premises being passed per month.

      Add in another 2 years of contracted rollout (and why wouldnt Labor commit rollout between now and the election?), then you have a further 2.5 million or so premises passed.

      Surely those sorts of numbers are past a point of no return…

      My personal assumption has been that Labor will go as long as it can, meaning an Oct/Nov election date. For starters, the later they leave it, the less chance LNP can stop NBN, and hence break whats going to be a key election promise.

      Dont think Labor hasnt thought of that with all this planning – the ramp up from 2013 onwards has been very carefully planned out. If it hadnt, we’d be seeing a muhc higher rollout starting now. Instead, we see the big push right at election time which I cant see as a coincidence

  26. Well said. Let’s hope NBNCo makes it clear it intends to work diligently through the traditional Christmas siesta.

  27. I think the funniest thing is people consistently referring to NBN targets for roll-outs, when they have consistently missed and overshot every single roll-out target thus far.

    • Personally, I think the funniest thing is seeing people repeatedly ignoring the reasons for the delay so far.

        • No need for you to guess. The answer is no.

          Feel free to have another guess or better still, try to be less selective when pointing out to the delay.

          • Pray tell me about these reasons and why they won’t be repeated. Tell me why you would trust a project plan that has in fact never hit any of the targets established. Mitigating circumstances only get you so far. And why would they all just happen to be front ended.

    • I was just about to ask whether anybody had thought to contact Alan Kohler to ask for a clarification on his timeframe.

      I see he’s done so:

      [begin quote]
      It’s true that the latest corporate plan says 54,000 premises will be “connected” by July next year. The election will be held in the second half of next year and I’d say the earliest the rollout could be stopped – unless Turnbull simply declares force majeure, “down tools” – is the following July, when 487,000 homes will be connected.

      My estimate of more than a million comes from another definition: “commenced or completed”. It seems to me that’s a more relevant number since the Coalition has said it will fulfill existing contracts.

      The plan says 758,000 premises will be commenced or completed by 31 December 2012. There is no estimate for that figure by the middle of next year, but I understand the internal forecast is 1.2 million. The number of premises to be “passed” by July 2014 is 1.1 million, and since it takes 12 months to build each module, that’s consistent with that same number being commenced in July 2013.
      [end quote]

  28. Renai, your articles are generally fairly balanced and weighing out the facts but im afraid that this one is a bit too full of diplomacy! Dont take my word on it, just read the replies below Malcolm’s Article.

Comments are closed.