Coalition releases long-awaited rival NBN policy

309

turnbull-abbott

news The Coalition this morning released its long-awaited policy alternative to Labor’s flagship National Broadband Network project, promising Australians download speeds of between 25Mbps and 100Mbps by the end of 2016 and 50Mbps to 100Mbps by the end of 2019, at a projected reduced total cost of $29.5 billion.

The Coalition’s full policy document has been uploaded online here, and there’s also an executive summary of the document online, both in PDF format. Additionally, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott and Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull have issued a joint media release associated with the policy launch to highlight its key points. There is also an extensive set of background briefing papers associated with the policy. Abbott and Turnbull also hosted a press conference in Sydney this morning; Delimiter will shortly upload the entire press conference video and question and answer session.

According to the pair’s media release, the Coalition’s policy is based on the core pledge that the group will deliver download speeds of between 25Mbps and 100Mbps by the end of 2016 — effectively the end of its first term in power — and 50Mbps to 100Mbps by the end of 2019, effectively the end of its second term. According to the Coalition’s statement this morning, the 25Mbps to 100Mbps pledge applies to “all premises”, while the higher pledge by 2019 applies to “90 percent of fixed line users”.

The detailed policy document discloses that these speeds will predominantly be delivered over the long-term with fibre to the node technology through upgrading Telstra’s existing copper network, focusing on areas where “the poorest broadband” services are currently suffered by residents and businesses. By the end of 2019, some 71 percent of premises will be covered with fibre to the node infrastructure.

In some other areas — such as greenfields housing estates, and “wherever copper has to be replaced” — such as areas where Telstra’s copper has degraded — fibre to the premise technology, as under Labor’s current NBN plan, will be deployed. The Coalition is estimating that some 22 percent of premises would be covered by FTTP under its plan.

As with Labor’s current NBN, the Coalition also plans to make use of fixed wireless and satellite technologies to reach a small segment of the population where it’s not economical to deploy fixed fibre infrastructure. Fixed wireless will be used to reach some four percent of premises under the Coalition’s plan, with another three percent served by satellite.

Its statement states that the Coalition’s NBN plan will ensure that average retail prices won’t exceed prices for Labor’s NBN, but that over time, savings achieved in the rollout will mean that the average household broadband plan for the Coalition’s NBN will be “considerably more affordable” than the same plans would be if Labor’s NBN project proceeded.

“By 2021, the projected retail cost of the average broadband plan under a Coalition NBN would be $66 per month, compared to at least $90 per month with Labor’s NBN,” the group’s statement this morning read.

The Coalition is also promising that its version of the NBN will be substantially cheaper on taxpayers’ wallets than Labor’s NBN, although the pair’s estimates about costs differ wildly. NBN Co is currently projecting that it will require about $30 billion worth of government investment over its life, with another $14 billion to be funded through debt arrangements. The total capital expenditure required for Labor’s NBN is currently estimated by NBN Co at $37.4 billion.

However, the Coalition is estimating that Labor’s NBN will cost more than $90 billion to complete, with the Coalition’s alternative to cost just $29.5 billion.

Turnbull told journalists this morning that the Coalition believed income from its plan would be similar to that under Labor’s NBN, meaning that it was likely to also be able to make a return on the Government’s invested capital in the project. Labor’s NBN is currently estimating it will make a return on the Government’s investment of $7.1 percent over the long term.

There are a number of other key pledges contained in the Coalition’s extensive policy document. For example, the Coalition proposes to conduct a number of reviews into the NBN project as soon as it takes power.

Firstly, the Coalition would conduct a rigorous review into NBN Co’s current commercial progress; a document that would also contain options to meet the Coalition’s different policy objectives. Secondly, the Coalition would conduct an independent audit into how “Labor’s costly NBN was designed with no cost-benefit analysis or any consideration of other options”.

Lastly, a Coalition Government would conduct an independent review into the long-term structure and regulation of telecommunications in Australia.

The Coalition included the following table in its document to detail how its policy varies from that of Labor’s, when it comes to the NBN:

coalition-nbn

Key to the Coalition’s alternative NBN vision is the claim that the flagship Labor project has been too slow to deliver better broadband to Australians.

“The Coalition’s plan will ensure that all Australian households and businesses can reap the benefits of the NBN much sooner and at affordable prices for consumers,” the group’s media release stated. “Labor has a record of failure in delivering the NBN. Under Kevin Rudd, Labor promised fast broadband for all Australians by 2013 for a cost of $4.7 billion.”

“After more than 5 years in Government, only 10,400 users have signed up to the Labor’s fibre network despite $7.5 billion in cash injections to the NBN by June – already almost double the money Kevin Rudd said was needed to complete the entire NBN. Based on the NBN’s own targets – which they have consistently failed to meet – the rollout will not be finished until 2021. On its current pace, the rollout will take years longer.”

“Labor now claims its NBN will cost $37 billion but latest estimates and available data indicate this projection is completely misleading. The real cost of Labor’s NBN is likely to be more than $90 billion by 2021.”

“There’ll be more accountability under a Coalition government with NBN Co. required to report more often to parliament, to explain its financial performance to taxpayers each quarter and provide more disclosure about its rollout and end-user take-up.”

Opinion/analysis of the Coalition’s policy to follow tomorrow.

309 COMMENTS

  1. Turnbull has ENTIRELY avoided talking about upload speeds that will be delivered (or not) by his plan, yet again. The fast upstream path is the beauty of fibre and makes broadband so much more useful than a one-way downloading tool. The mish-mash of technologies proposed by the coalition will deliver a highly variable upstream speed, and depending on the condition of copper, it may be no better than 1-2Mbps.

    • That’s because Uncle Rupert’s happy little consumers (which we’re all meant to be, naturally) don’t need to upload, just download from the favoured commercial partners…

    • That’s the most pertinent point I’ve taken away from all this too. No reference to upload speeds whatsoever, unless people have found otherwise in the detailed written policy? (I haven’t read it yet). But regardless, we know what copper is and isn’t capable of, so upload speeds will therefore suck. Most users probably don’t even think about uploading, or understand how it differentiates from download speed. By focusing on download speeds only, the coalition are yet again pulling wool over people’s eyes.

      The comparison chart above looks and reads like its been designed by an 8 year old. Its so oversimplified and misleading on just about every point.

      • I saw a reference to it somewhere in the reading today and Turnbull said that it would be about 1/4 of the download speed. I am sorry I can’t give you a reference at the moment but I can’t remember exactly where I saw it. If I see it again I will post it for you.

    • If you want FTTH you can have FTTH.

      Why are people having such problems understand this? The only difference between the Coalitions plan and Labors plan is that the Coalitions Plan is 1/3rd the cost, will be delivered by 2016 and user pays… not the Australian taxpayer.

      • truth never hurts but unfettered ignorance sure does… take a seat over on the right with the Jones and Bolt boys son…

      • More idiotic nonsense from you again? It won’t be delivered by 2016, it will take until 2019 for complete deployment… And then only to 70% of the country. Try explaining that it will NEVER reach the last 30% to those poor suckers.

        It’s not 1/3rd the cost, it’s around 20% cheaper for 30% less network.

        NBN build costs aren’t borne by the tax payer, they’re funded by debt which is paid off by users.

        Can you please acquire some facts before posting your lame, idiotic BS in future.

      • “If you want FTTH you can have FTTH.”

        yep, we just have to avoid voting for the coalition of clowns. Thanks for pointing that out.

      • NOT 1/3 OF THE COST! YOU WANT TO BELIEVE THE $90BN FIGURE THEN I SAY MORE FOOL YOU.
        WHICH SCHOOL DID YOU GO TO? THE SAME SCHOOL AS MAL BY THE SOUND OF IT..
        37.4 DIVIDED BY 3 DOESN’T REPEAT DOESN’T EQUAL 29.4

        TELL US AGAIN HOW WIRELESS IS THE FUTURE….

      • Your claim is nonsense because FTTN and Copper to the Home Liberal policy is simply not going to deliver to all Australians 25 mbps.

  2. “The Coalition’s Plan for Fast Broadband and an Affordable NBN” makes reference to “background papers” that are not included on their website’s release of information.

    Any idea when that will be provided?

  3. NBN Maximum download rates in 2021 25-100. Plan likely to be chosen by most users 12? How is it possible to choose a 12 when the minimum available is 25?

    I thought the plan is that by then even the wireless customers will be getting 25

    Not to mention “Maximum Download speeds” with FttH it should be listed as Minimum download speeds or actual download speeds because the speed you pay for is the speed you get.

    No mention of potential download speed using the existing infrastructure in 2021 since the FttH is already capable of much faster than 100 and the FttN will always be held back by the copper unless the coalition wants to say how much it will cost to upgrade in 20 years time.

    • ” …How is it possible to choose a 12 when the minimum available is 25?”

      According to the table, by 2021 the min speed for most people will be 50 MBps. With media delivery moving online more and more, I can’t imagine that 50% of people would choose a half ADSL2+ speed in 2021. Everyone thought ADSL was fast when it arrived, then ADSL2/2+, but as demands, uses and expectations increase, they don’t seem fast now. I don’t believe the 50% figure.

      • > According to the table, by 2021 the min speed for most people will be 50 MBps. With media delivery moving online more and more, I can’t imagine that 50% of people would choose a half ADSL2+ speed in 2021.

        I guess you haven’t read either the first or second NBNCo Corporate Plan. In both editions despite adjusting the take-up of other speeds, 12/1Mbps remained fairly constant at 50% of users on fibre.

        NBNCo are predicting that less 5% of customers in 2028 will have 1Gbps connections. No surprise when the wholesale AVC cost is $150/month ($1800/year). $3000 to install fibre sounds cheap compared to that.

        • “I guess you haven’t read either the first or second NBNCo Corporate Plan. In both editions despite adjusting the take-up of other speeds, 12/1Mbps remained fairly constant at 50% of users on fibre.”

          I guess you haven’t read about the actual take-up figures. As at October 2012, 44% of the services were on the highest plan (100Mbps). Several months before that only 16% of the plans were on the base (12Mbps) level.

          http://delimiter.com.au/2012/10/18/huge-100mbps-demand-44-of-nbn-users-take-top-speed/

          • So if you establish a restaurant in your local main street that services a surrounding catchment of 500 residences….. only 5 families come to dine at your restaurant every week, but they order the more expensive items on your menu… your restaurant is a raging success????

          • So if you establish a restaurant in your local main street that services a surrounding catchment of 500 residences….. all 500 families come to dine at your restaurant every week, but you only serve items that you cooked last year and won’t let them order anything new… your restaurant is a raging success????

          • In that scenario, my restaurant is financially solvent and won’t require a taxpayer bail-out.

          • NBN in it’s latest financial reports says it is paying NBN Staff (not contractors rolling out fibre, just their own internal staff) $150 Million dollars a year.

            NBN’s revenue meanwhile was only a measily $5 Million dollars.

            So those numbers again… $150M in payroll expenses…. $5M in revenue.

            They can’t even pay their own staff yet, let alone the $44 Billion Dollar loan thats backed by Aussie taxpayers.

          • I’m not actually sure how this comparison is even remotely relevant? The NBN will (eventually) be used by almost everyone. A more appropriate version of your comparison would be all 500 residences going to the restaurant each week, with 220 of them ordering meals at the more expensive end of the scale. Raging success? Hell yes.

    • i’d seriously doubt that

      so Telstra shares would have jumped a fair bit on this announcement

    • There is no line rental, the copper network will be owned by NBN Co.

      Conjob has already given Telstra $11 Billion dollars to decommission their copper so it’s not going to cost them anything to hand over to NBN.

  4. Promised – 44bil
    Likely – 94bil

    promised – 2021
    likely – 2025

    I CAN MAKE UP NUMBERS TOO TURNBULL
    Here is one. Your plan is 100% bullshit.

    • Why does the Earl provide inflated figures for the other guy’s network without basis, but doesn’t do any for his own? So much for honesty in politics…

    • @Grey Wind

      I CAN MAKE UP NUMBERS TOO TURNBULL
      Here is one. Your plan is 100% bullshit.

      No you didn’t make that up because thats exactly the truth of what it is, a massive stinking pile of bullshit.

    • The numbers aren’t “made up”. Read the Background Paper. There’s 36 pages of solid evidence and analysis there which substantiate those numbers.

      You guys have been screaming for so-called “EVIDENCE”…. well it’s all laid out in full glory in the Background Paper released today.

      • Yes, he went through the document the ACCC asked for to verify pricing and he cherry picked every worst case scenario number he could find (several from different unrelated scenarios).

        Can’t really expect much more from a lawyer/banker turned politician I suppose, but factual? No.

        • *laugh*

          I clicked on the link (hoping to encounter a refreshing piece of critical, informative analysis)…. saw “David Braue”… and [backspace] navigate back to this page immediately…..

          I’ve read enough of his editorials to know not to waste any more of my time reading them. But, to each his own.

          • You wouldn’t want facts to get in the way of your fanaticism, would you?

            Look even news Ltd can’t bring itself to support the plan

          • You can skip about half way down the article to avoid most of the rhetoric. Some of the numbers he uses are not quite right, but he has valid points.

          • So, according to an FTTH NBN supporter, the article is full of rhetoric and false numbers?

            Looks like my honed [backspace] instinct was spot on!

            *laughs*

          • I will point out inaccuracies where I see them.

            However, like I said he makes some valid points and the NQR factor of some of his numbers does not materially affect the outcome. The “true” numbers are easily referenced in the background document by anyone who cares to read it, and the conclusions still stand.

            *mutters something about willful ignorance*

          • There are some people who have suggested that the writer of that piece is pretty biased in his views. I think the editor here has even suggested that. :-)

      • As others have said, the background paper is a cringe-worth pile of shit that isn’t worth the paper it is printed on.

  5. The $62/month estimated wholesale price per month is a lie. It’s the average revenue per user that’s $62.

    The wholesale AVC price for 12 Mbps is $24, and the maximum permissible under the likely SAU will be about $25 by 2021.

    It’s because of the 100 Mbps+ plans that the coalition plan can’t offer that it’s higher. The reason the NBN Co price on that is “less affordable” is because the coalition solution can’t keep up with increased demand for higher usage. That’s it.

    • The $62/month estimated wholesale price per month is a lie. It’s the average revenue per user that’s $62.
      The wholesale AVC price for 12 Mbps is $24, and the maximum permissible under the likely SAU will be about $25 by 2021.

      It’s not a lie. There’s no such thing as an “AVC-only $24 wholesale broadband plan”. It’s clearly mandatory for RSPs to provision CVC for each AVC port subscribed.

      What is truly misleading is to claim that “wholesale charges are only $24 for the AVC”, represent this as the “cost of accessing the NBN” and completely ignore the necessary CVC expenditure required for NBNco to recoup its capital costs which will inevitably be passed onto consumers. Bottomline is NBNco needs that $62 in total monthly billings from each user to survive financially, and that is the relevant monthly wholesale cost of NBN access to consumers. Everything else is just semantics.

      The reason the NBN Co price on that is “less affordable” is because the coalition solution can’t keep up with increased demand for higher usage. That’s it.

      The reason NBNco’s price is more expensive is because the FTTP network Conroy is planning to build cost at least three times more than an FTTN network. Higher capital base = higher annual interest charges = higher wholesale cost.

      • OK, let’s look at CVC pricing for a 20 GB download limit:

        20 GB/month = 0.062 Mbps. 0.062 Mbps * $20/Mbps = $1.24

        $24+$1.24 = $25.24.

        But in your world $1.24 ≈ $38.

        Your math is getting more and more amusing. I’m being, for 20 GB average actual usage (not download limit!), about 5% misleading, while you’re being 3065% misleading.

      • That is $62 AVERAGE revenue per user. You want to ignore the fact that FTTH is capable of a whole lot more then ADSL2 is? The revenue includes businesses shifting to using Gb NBN fibre, hospitals, schools, pay tv delivery. Pretending all the revenue comes from homes users ISP connections is wrong.

  6. Plam most user choose in 2013 is 100 Mb/s. Why will users choose 12Mb/s in 2021?

    • Because, under the coalition we will be going so far backward, that 12mbps will seem so forward by 2012.

      Never let that silly thing like the actual sign up rates for 100mbps make up a huge percentage, you can’t use that fact, so just make up one.

    • > Plam most user choose in 2013 is 100 Mb/s. Why will users choose 12Mb/s in 2021?

      This is NBNCo’s prediction has has been consistent in both Corporate Plans. This is the biggest failure of Labor’s policy, because with Labor’s version the poor will be stuck on plans slower than HFC, FTTN, 4G and almost half of ADSL2+ connections, subsidising the rich who can afford the game changing faster plans. Same deal in electricity prices – everybody pays for the infrastructure but the poor cannot afford to run an aircon to cool their house.

      • “This is NBNCo’s prediction has has been consistent in both Corporate Plans.”

        But not consistent with real world facts where most are already choosing the fastest plans. (Your early adopter claim expires in June btw, get ready to eat crow).

        “because with Labor’s version the poor will be stuck on plans slower than HFC, FTTN, 4G and almost half of ADSL2+ connections”

        False.

        “subsidising the rich who can afford the game changing faster plans. ”

        False.

      • iiNet have a nice $70 100/40 NBN plan thats a LOT cheaper than HFC and if you shop around you can get 25/5 plans from $40 a month ($26 a month cheaper than Malcolm’s and without having to worry that he may also charge line rental on top of that).

  7. Surely they (the Liberal Party) are taking the pi55 out of us.

    This has to be a stitch up.

    • I want the government to give me a free 50″ TV… doesn’t mean I should get one.

      The problem with questions like these is they ask you if you want something without first specifying how much it will cost you personally.

      • That’s a very good point – we should know how much it’ll cost us, personally.

        Luckily for us, there’s all these corporate plans that NBNCo have prepared, setting that out. Combine that with the prices that ISPs are offering for the NBN right now, and – golly, it’ll cost me nothing, compared to what I’m currently paying for home connectivity right now!

        Actually, it’ll be slightly cheaper… and offer a superior service. And I’m on HFC cable, so I guess for those poor souls stuck on ADSL1 (or such crappy copper that they might as well be on ADSL1) it’s even better! More for less sounds like a good deal to me!

      • “Free”??

        It’ll cost me personally $69.95 a month for 100/40 20Gb+20Gb (iiNet) under the real NBN, the “Not-the-NBN” one will cost me a lot more apparently considering average/basic plans start at $66 a month.

        The FTTP network will cost $37B, which will be paid back by NBNCo (from the money I and other users of the system pay). It’s not rocket science, it’s called a “user pays” system in case you haven’t heard of them.

        I don’t see any “free” in there, do you? So why make stuff up “Truth” /coughcough?

  8. I love how Malcolm Turnbull in that press conference said that the only person in a hypothetical suburb who would want fibre on demand is an architect working for an architectural firm in Shanghai.

    And he also said that no other country is doing an NBN with a government monopoly like Australia.

    Meanwhile, in the real world, the 100% government-owned China Unicom, China Telecom and China Mobile are going from 94 million FTTH subscribers by the end of 2012 to 129 million FTTH by the end of 2013.

    It just goes to show what they think about us Australians. Both how stupid they think we are and how little we deserve.

    • And he also said that no other country is doing an NBN with a government monopoly like Australia.

      CORRECT.

      Meanwhile, in the real world, the 100% government-owned China Unicom, China Telecom and China Mobile

      China Unicom, China Telecom and China Mobile are all public companies listed on Hong Kong Stock Exchange and New York Stock Exchange. You can buy shares in them right now.

  9. “Disruption at users premises:
    Coalition: No
    NBN: Yes”

    …How the hell is that possibly true when NBN fibre gets installed beside your existing connection and you swap over at a time of your choosing with no downtime compared to the bullcrapolitions rip up your copper for a few days to a week while doing all the work required then reconnecting your connection with no working phone or internet the entire time they are working on it?

    • no disruption at user premises = no trenching brand new fiber lead-in conduit under garden bed to external wall of residence

      • Because, you know, every house in Australia has no duct from the pit. And having no phone line for a week is *far* less disruption than having to do a bit of gardening… [rolls eyes]

        • Under Telstra Agreement, NBNco cannot touch the copper lead-in conduits (remain property of Telstra)… NBNco has to construct brand new conduits for fiber which they retain ownership of.

          Helps to know the facts.

      • Only if it isn’t a drop from the pole out on the street.

        Percentage of premesis that will be affected?

  10. Hi Renai,

    I have to ask … what was your thoughts when they decided to veer into sports questioning?

    • Oops, double post Renai. I thought I could get in before it took in order to correct my poor English. Could you please delete the first one.

  11. Hi Renai,

    I have to ask … what were your thoughts when they decided to veer into sports questioning?

    • Yep. I hear you can get your food at McDonald’s served extra fast as well.

      But then again, it’s hardly nutritious.

      Same with the fast food Coalition broadband. It’ll fill a hole, but after it’s digested, the repercussions are … to say the least … unwanted.

    • “especially if I get something sooner!”

      yep, because the sooner you get it the sooner you can start the waiting process again… except next time it’ll be longer, but that’s a good thing right?

  12. i count five lies possibly six in that ‘at a glance ‘ page.

    Capex on the Lib side of the column: not including access to copper costs. on the Labor side ‘likely’ 71 bn.
    Required funding ditto – not including copper access costs and ‘likely 94bn’ on labor side
    plan chosen by most users in 2021 ’12 Mbit’
    ‘estimated ‘ wholesale price 2021 which is more correctly a conflated figure with ARPU as quink points out – ’62/month’
    Disruption at user premises ‘no’ under Lib column – if ANY of the copper needs rectification from the node to the user, there will be disruption
    and price can be less than the price cap – im not sure how to read this line but i suspect it is false to say Labor column is ‘no’

    i see on 9msn Tony is quoted saying “the government had wasted billion of dollars that could not be recovered, but the coalition would save money.” i believe the equity investments to date figure is 3.8 bn – which they have inflated to 7.5bn. whichever the figure a portion of that are setup costs that would also have been borne by any Coalition plan had they won the last election, i can only say ‘horse dookies’.

    i also have queries about the ‘estimated retail per month 2021’ costs for both columns.
    i also have queries about the ‘private sector’ being able to build such a network given Vodaphone says the opposite http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/458429/private_sector_couldn_t_build_nbn_vodafone_ceo/ and they are by no means the only ones to say so.
    it certainly doesnt look cheaper by a third unless you accept their bogus numbers. it certainly is exactly as fast as many here have been saying – 2019 was a common call, and that has been proven correct. it certainly doesnt have any analysis of FTTH upgrade costs.
    they also plan to flog theirs off after the build is complete but there still is no examination of how it will pay for itself. other than the line ‘it will make income so it should be able to do the same’. no acknowledgement that the FTTH plan has a larger timespan to do so and the compressed lifespan of FTTN will have an effect on its repayability.
    they got in a nice little sledge at Rudd completely ignoring that they are comparing apples and oranges between the FTTN RFP and the final FTTH policy.
    and they got a sledge in on the number of users connected, nevermind the documented and reasonable delays en route.
    and despite their sledging of the ‘off budget’ nature of the Labor policy they will take the same tack, and yet claim there will be ‘more accountability’ and be required to report ‘more often to parliament’ – does anyone have an exhaustive list of the number of committees NBNco is already obligated to face up to? again i call horse dookies.

    it is a much better effort than what was fielded at the last election but its still pretty skeletonic, to my view. high on rhetoric and not much by way of substance.

    • > i count five lies possibly six in that ‘at a glance ‘ page.

      I wish you actually had a basic understanding of what Labor are promising. At some point most people are going to discover it is vastly different to what they are expecting. Big hint: it is not Google Fibre.

      > Capex on the Lib side of the column: not including access to copper costs. on the Labor side ‘likely’ 71 bn.

      I’d suggest that more detail is required on this.

      > Required funding ditto – not including copper access costs and ‘likely 94bn’ on labor side

      The estimate for Labor’s plan does sound a little high, but NBNCo does seem to be in serious dispute with most (all?) of the contractors so it is entirely possible that the costs could blow out.

      > plan chosen by most users in 2021 ’12 Mbit’

      Strange how you could consider this a lie when this is exactly what NBNCo have been saying since the first Corporate Plan. You might want to read the rest of the document to see what other misconceptions you have. Did you know that NBNCo are predicting less than 5% will have 1Gbps in 2028?

      > ‘estimated ‘ wholesale price 2021 which is more correctly a conflated figure with ARPU as quink points out – ’62/month’

      NBNCo haven’t been able to hit their ARPU target yet – supposed to be $33-$34, but much closer to $20. The low ARPU is even more concerning given that we are in the early adopter phase where high end users are jumping on first, so ARPU should be higher.

      > Disruption at user premises ‘no’ under Lib column – if ANY of the copper needs rectification from the node to the user, there will be disruption

      Changing over the copper at the corner should be a much quicker process and not require installation of a NTU on the premises (e.g. site visit).

      > and price can be less than the price cap – im not sure how to read this line but i suspect it is false to say Labor column is ‘no’

      NBNCo set the price – there is one price. If NBNCo costs go up (e.g. construction costs increase, bureaucracy fattens) then ACCC will allow them to increase prices (hello Telstra!)

      With the Liberal plan there will be competition between providers (closer to the model we have now). The government sets a maximum price to avoid gouging (hello Telstra!) where there is no competition.

      The Liberal plan is not as technically good as what Labor are promising. However, the Labor vision has many shortcomings and falls far short of what Google Fibre delivers for a cheaper process. But you need to look at how the network will actually be used and remember that the bits don’t care about the medium, just throughput, latency and reliability. When under the Labor plan, 50% are connecting at 12/1Mbps, ( FTTN, HFC, 4G and almost half of ADSL2+ connections will provide that) then the value of FTTP becomes questionable. The fact that the wholesale AVC charge for 1Gbps is $150/month ($1800/year) and fibre under the Liberal plan costing $3000 to install means that truly fast speeds are likely to be significantly cheaper under the Liberal plan.

      • Matthews

        I am glad to see you finally coming out of closet. Despite your protests, we always knew you had a soft spot for the coalition.

        • You noticed that too? yep true colors shown today… I like to say I’m surprised but I’m not.

        • > I am glad to see you finally coming out of closet. Despite your protests, we always knew you had a soft spot for the coalition.

          I have a soft spot for people who can balance the books and implement policies which actually achieve their goals.

          Who benefited most from the Building Education Revolution funding? Private schools because they had expansion plans already in place so were able to move quickly and negotiated hard bargains with builders.

          • Still a bit coy? I don’t understand why you are so reticent to acknowledge your love of the coalition. That’s OK. It is not a crime. But please, do not imply that only the coalition can balance books, or see project to their end.

            No matter how much you protest, it is clear to most people on this site where your preference lies. So, stop pretending that you are motivated by higher goals. In other words, do not insult our intelligence.

          • > Still a bit coy? I don’t understand why you are so reticent to acknowledge your love of the coalition. That’s OK. It is not a crime. But please, do not imply that only the coalition can balance books, or see project to their end.

            I don’t love the coalition, but the alternative has proven to be a disaster. When was the last time Labor had a budget surplus?

            > No matter how much you protest, it is clear to most people on this site where your preference lies. So, stop pretending that you are motivated by higher goals. In other words, do not insult our intelligence.

            My preferences are for a solution that delivers benefits to all Australians. Labor’s NBN plan will at best see 50% stuck on 12/1Mbps and more likely many abandon fibre for faster and cheaper wireless speeds. My preference is for Google Fibre, but I doubt we will see that here.

            It is worth remembering that the only reason Labor proposed FTTP is because they made a complete hash of FTTN and needed something else. If Telstra had played ball, the Labor fanbois would be extolling the virtues of FTTN today instead of dismissing it. If Labor had not cancelled OPEL, regional Australians would have been experiencing the same speeds offered by NBNCo for half a decade.

            Finally, I guess by attempting to tar me with a coalition brush you are acknowledging that you cannot argue against the Liberal plan on merit.

          • “Labor’s NBN plan will at best see 50% stuck on 12/1Mbps and more likely many abandon fibre for faster and cheaper wireless speeds”

            Who do you think you are fooling Mathew? Still want to quote conservative projections rather than face the facts of actual take up? Very few people are taking up 12Mb plans. Man, try living in reality rather than the land of spin.

          • The only reason they’d be “stuck” on 12Mbps is if they choose to be “stuck” on it, even under satellite/wireless the small minority in the bush will be able to get at least 25Mbps.

          • Not matter how many times you post it. No one is going to change the speeds and the CVC changes so you can max out a 1Gb connection with unlimited data so you can bit torrent cheaper. It’s a bit unfair to expect those poor you are so concerned about to have to pay more for speed and data they cannot use to subsidise you.

          • > Not matter how many times you post it. No one is going to change the speeds and the CVC changes so you can max out a 1Gb connection with unlimited data so you can bit torrent cheaper. It’s a bit unfair to expect those poor you are so concerned about to have to pay more for speed and data they cannot use to subsidise you.

            Data is what puts load on the network, therefore it is people who download during peak periods that should pay. People who want to use the network only occasionally should not subsidise those who use it primarily for downloading.

          • “If Labor had not cancelled OPEL, regional Australians would have been experiencing the same speeds offered by NBNCo for half a decade.”

            Firstly, once again we have private companies not meeting their contractual obligations… hence the cancellation of OPEL.

            But seriously, I know even two of the most ardent anti-NBNers here, aren’t even willing to try to talk up OPEL, to bag the NBN… but yet!

          • Demonstrating your selctive memory loss again are we Mathew?

            OPEL was a band-aide on a bullet wound and would not have achieved even 60% of it’s requirements .. that’s why it was cancelled!

          • Interesting too djos…

            FttN has been brought back from the dead (strangely only a few days after MT agreed with AJ that wireless is actually the future) but OPEL wasn’t.

          • True NBNAlex

            Contradictions are not usually a problem for politicians …. used car salesmen or con men.

      • never said it was Google Fibre. but maybe you could take some of your own advice re understanding what labor are delivering.

        “Only 16 percent of the active services on our fibre network are for the entry-level speed tier of 12Mbps.”
        http://delimiter.com.au/2012/10/18/huge-100mbps-demand-44-of-nbn-users-take-top-speed/

        12mbit would have to become very popular to hit that 50% mark. and the evidence is that it aint. you do understand the corporate plan tier breakdown was not set in stone? subject to real world experience?

        entirely possible costs could blow out, yes – but i dont see a case for it to go by a multiple of ~5x for the 12 bn labour component, to hit an all up figure of ~90 bn(12×5+25.4). simply not credible. the conditions of the extant contracts build in price certainty. future contracts may be larger but i do not expect it will be anywhere near that multiplier.

        changing over copper by definition requires a disconnection of service and then reconnection. given the copper has to be interdicted at some point up to 5-600m from a premises i think you are underestimating the time gap involved there.

        conversely fitting an NTU on the side of the house in tandem with the copper, leaving the copper connected during the process (unless its a pull through situation) leaves the customer connected until they cut over from one fixed line service to the other. comparing the two it looks to me the FTTN process is more disruptive to the consumer, and i regard that disruption more significant than hanging the NTU on the wall. fitting an NTU is inconvenient, yes. but not as significant a disruption as losing your line for however long it takes to do the FTTN cutover.

        ACCC have laid down limited conditions to any price rise and do indeed place in a cap on rises – none for the first 5 years and then a MAX of CPI minus1.5%. NBNco is not at all obligated to rise by the maximum permitted – so it certainly can be ‘less than the cap’.

        you already knew most of this tho.

    • Hardly ironic, considering preserving the Foxtel pay-TV monopoly is probably one of the key reasons for killing the FTTH rollout…

      • News Corp’s BSkyB investment is a thousand times more valuable than small little Antipodean Foxtel….

        Are you saying News Corp publications in UK have been campaigning against BT UK’s FTTN rollout and Virgin Media’s cable rollout too?

        Nice conspiracy theory, problem is full of holes.

        • Considering the papers are being cut loose from the main corp (along with Foxtel), and Foxtel is the only thing in the cast off group that actually has any revenue growth and it’s no wonder the papers are looking out for it…

        • Wow! You are an apologist for the Coalition aren’t you.
          I agree with the point that was noted their announcement was done in a Murdoch owned facility. So far in most of what I am seeing from the Coalition, has been the protections of the standing interests of Rupert and Gina and little else.
          I have seen scant little from the Coalition that protects the main Electorate from a rabid Market that requires price gouging in order to sedate their Shareholder’s of private firms demand for profit growth, for what is an essential services in this modern age. There are such things as natural monopolies even though the Rabid Capitalist’s always deny such, naturally, if they don’t own the monopoly already.
          I now await your apologist response.

  13. So under the Lib FTTN do we still have to pay Telstra or whoever a line rental? Or is that factored into the Libs plan for it to be cheaper?

    • Will read the full doc latter but it could well be how they plan to avoid paying for the the copper if they make everyone have to lease that last mile off Telstra like we do now(either with ADSL spectrum meaning we have to pay for a phone line or via the extra cost for naked DSL).

  14. Prediction: by the end of their first term in govt, rather than having delivered most people speeds of btw 25-100mbps, the coalition will only have barely sorted out new contractual arrangements.

    • So where Labor is pretty much after 2 terms of government…

      Still “Working out their contractor issues with “Mobilisation””

      Are the NBN trucks out of diesel?

      • Awesome, lets continue the delays. Maybe we could have another change of govt and another round of contractual renegotiations in 2016 or 2019.

  15. Hey Renai,

    Both of your links to the policy document point to the summary. Any chance of a link to the full policy document please.

    For what it is worth my reading of the summary is that the policy is rotten to the core but before I make any harsh comments I would like to at least have a look at the full document which I understand contains information on the assumptions that they have made.

  16. Two points, from the general to the specific ….

    1. Remove the unsubstantiated rhetoric and speculation regarding the current NBN and that it could cost up to $90B and you are left with an Opposition alternative that will cost $30M …. for what exactly? Degrading copper (supposedly with no value), no specific performance levels (up to), no detail, for a network that will have to be upgraded yet again (inefficiently at) sometime in the near future.
    2. “The Coalition this morning released its long-awaited policy alternative to Labor’s flagship National Broadband Network project, promising Australians download speeds of between 25Mbps and 100Mbps by the end of 2016 and 50Mbps to 100Mbps by the end of 2019, at a projected reduced total cost of $29.5 billion.” These claims are simply not achievable. Every exchange will have some consumers connected who do not receive 25Mbps. To reach that claim, Every exchange, every node, would have to be installed within 3 years.

    This policy is simply rhetoric wrapped up in spin and bullshit. It makes outlandish claims, sets unachievable targets, and relies on the general punters ignorance to not recognize it. It’s a turkey in a country that doesn’t celebrate Thanksgiving.

    • Why update all exchanges when you can just offer high latency satellite connections at a nominal 25mbps?

  17. A couple of slight of hand moments in the launch I noticed….
    Turnbull talked about the ‘suburban’ user, never ONCE mentioned regional Australia. Afterwards Anthony Albanese correctly pointed out regional Australia would remain stuck with a second class system under the Coalition plan. One of the biggest selling points of Labor’s NBN is the leveling of the technology playing field, so regional customers aren’t disadvantaged.
    Secondly, Turnbull was at pains to point out if your copper is failing you can get it upgraded. I highly doubt it.
    Our copper line has been failing for five years. Generally poor quality phone reception, and in the rain the line dies or becomes unusable. WE now use our iPhones for most calls. We’ve had Telstra out at least once a year, but they wont upgrade it. I’ve talked to a couple of the engineers they’ve sent out, they both said the same thing – Telstra wont replace anything until it actually fails. So if infrastructure hangs in there, albeit performing very poorly, you can never get it replaced by Telstra.

    • Afterwards Anthony Albanese correctly pointed out regional Australia would remain stuck with a second class system under the Coalition plan.

      NOT TRUE. No more so than under ALP’s NBN. Read the background paper:

      93% of premises will be on fixed-line broadband
      7% on fixed wireless/satellite

      That final 7% relegated to fixed wireless/satellite is no different than current plan.

      Secondly, Turnbull was at pains to point out if your copper is failing you can get it upgraded. I highly doubt it.

      Read the background paper:

      Of the 93% premises with fixed-line broadband, there is provision for 1.2 million brownfield FTTP builds for wet/bad copper:

      Quote: ” Excluding MDUs, about 9 per cent of premises are connected using FTTP in the period 2014‐2019.  These premises are assumed to be in areas with the poorest quality or most maintenance‐intensive copper networks.”

      Stop assuming the worst about Coalition policy and all the FUD being spread and actually read the policy papers released.

    • > Turnbull talked about the ‘suburban’ user, never ONCE mentioned regional Australia. Afterwards Anthony Albanese correctly pointed out regional Australia would remain stuck with a second class system under the Coalition plan. One of the biggest selling points of Labor’s NBN is the leveling of the technology playing field, so regional customers aren’t disadvantaged.

      Depends what you define as regional. If you mean cities of above 1000 premises then the Labor plan might be better, however for smaller towns (and those are what I would consider truly regional) they will be worse off. A case in point – Gladstone, SA. The local Anglican church wants to put in a video conferencing system but they cannot because there is insufficient bandwidth available. Under Labor they will have the ADSL disconnected and have to rely on wireless. Under the Liberal plan there is a reasonable chance that their exchange will be upgraded to FTTN or they could install fibre.

      > Secondly, Turnbull was at pains to point out if your copper is failing you can get it upgraded. I highly doubt it.

      If the copper has a longer lifetime then there is more chance of this and also less distance for the fault to occur on.

      > Our copper line has been failing for five years. Generally poor quality phone reception, and in the rain the line dies or becomes unusable. WE now use our iPhones for most calls. We’ve had Telstra out at least once a year, but they wont upgrade it. I’ve talked to a couple of the engineers they’ve sent out, they both said the same thing – Telstra wont replace anything until it actually fails. So if infrastructure hangs in there, albeit performing very poorly, you can never get it replaced by Telstra.

      How bad is it really? There are minimum service levels that Telstra have to meet. Complain to your local MP if you cannot get action out of Telstra.

      • ‘Under the Liberal plan there is a reasonable chance that their exchange will be upgraded to FTTN or they could install fibre.’

        You’re getting a bit carried away. I think it is time you contact coalition HQ for some arguments refill.

        Why don’t you afford Labor the same amount of optimistic speculation? Just try, it might be fun.

        • > You’re getting a bit carried away. I think it is time you contact coalition HQ for some arguments refill.
          > Why don’t you afford Labor the same amount of optimistic speculation? Just try, it might be fun.

          You don’t have to speculate about Labor’s plans. It is in the NBNCo Corporate Plan. Gladstone SA will be receiving wireless coverage only. There are plenty of other locations like it right across the country.

          • No, but you are speculating about the coalition’s plan.’ Or do you have inside information?

            It is more than obvious that anything labor does you find fault with and anything the coalition does that less than perfect you either speculate or rationalise.

            I know labor can’t do anything right and the opposition god’s gift to this nation.

          • I suspect it has a lot to do with Gladstone only getting wireless coverage initially under the FTTP plan. So he’s backing the Liberal FTTN which will give him the exact same speed initially, and a chance of getting 50Mbps somewhere after Tony gets a second term (though personally I wouldn’t actually trust mister “non-core, blood oath” to deliver).

  18. “In April 2007 Kevin Rudd promised voters a National Broadband Network supported by $4.7 Billion of public funding to be completed in 2013. Five years later Labor policy is lurching from one disaster to the next” http://lpa.webcontent.s3.amazonaws.com/NBN/The%20Coalition%E2%80%99s%20Plan%20for%20Fast%20Broadband%20and%20an%20Affordable%20NBN.pdf

    In March 2007 ” Prime Minister John Howard will announce the grant of between $100 million and $150 million to expand broadband infrastructure in areas where it is needed, but not available. Much of the demand appears to be in outer suburbs, which also appear to be marginal seats” http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2007/03/08/1173166895703.html

    In July 2007 “The OECD has passed judgement on Australia’s broadband in a study calling it among the slowest and most expensive in the world, however, Communications Minister Helen Coonan claims it was a “strong report card” for the nation’s infrastructure.”
    “Communications Minister Helen Coonan, however, preferred to concentrate on the upside of the report, such as Australia’s relatively high level of domain name registrations per capita.

    “This is an outstanding achievement considering the particular challenges of providing telecommunications access at fair prices over a vast continent with a small population,” she said in a statement. ” http://www.zdnet.com/australian-broadband-among-worlds-worst-oecd-1339280104/

    In May 2010 Joe Hockey in his Press Club speech claimed “Under a Coalition government the National Broadband Network would be also cancelled completely, saving $18 billion by 2013-14.”
    http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/347252/hockey_wields_meat_axe_ict/

    Mr Turnbull it appears that Liberal broadband policy is “lurching from one disaster to the next”.

  19. I like the part where you can get between 25-100Mbit connection with LNP. But they don’t mention you can pay for a 100Mbit connection and get a 25Mbit speeds because of the state of copper. I hear that fiber is coming down on the of the main streets in my suburb. With any luck it is make it to my door before LNP throws this whole thing up in the air like that “F*ck this sh*t it’s friday!” meme.

  20. By 2021 the NBN will offer speeds of 25~100Mbps? It’s kinda sad they forgot a zero there… if you can’t get your basic facts right…

  21. “wherever copper has to be replaced” — such as areas where Telstra’s copper has degraded — fibre to the premise technology, as under Labor’s current NBN plan, will be deployed

    Good news everyone! We’re all getting FTTP…

    • LOL I thought that too.. then I remembered my property was new, so the copper only went in 4 years ago… *Goddamit*

      • I saw some discussion on Whirlpool a short while ago that involved a very simple upgrade plan for copper.

        It’s beautifully simple and stating the one fact that most succinctly summarises it, involves acid in a bucket.

        • no shortage of acid where i work. ;)

          having said that, i’ll be getting NBN via FTTH later this year anyway so the LNP can suck it! :p

  22. Renai, was there any word from Malcom Turnbull on how prices for the people who are already connected to the Labour NBN will change? If he is throwing the cross subsidy model in the bin and killing the formula that NBN Co has devised to get a 7% ROI, how will the costs change for those fortunate enough to be connected before LNP stop FTTH?

    Also with the Fibre on demand where you pay the ~$5000 to get a fibre tail, what are the access prices going to be for this service? FTTN & FTTH are very different technologies and require different equipment to function, so will you be expected to cover the cost of the FTTH equipment in the “Node” in addition to the ~$5000 outlay to get someone to bring fibre cable to your front door?

    Seems like more unanswered than answered questions IMHO.

    • Apparently the Coalition retail price will be $24 a month cheaper than the current plan. $1 wholesale prices will be a hard way to pay back the $30B

  23. I just heard MT state on ABC radio, that FTTN can be upgraded very cheaply.

    If this is so, then why not do it now.

    Also, it is interesting that only a few months ago, MT could not cost his policy because he did not have enough info from NBN but now, magically, he knows how much it will eventually cost.

  24. Hi Renai, a question for Mr Turnbull. In his document he compares FTTH vs FTTN -> FTTH.
    His costings for the subsequent on demand upgrade are the same as a full FTTH rollout – $450 of “reuses” FTTN architecture per household. How does it intend ad hoc upgrades to be made at the same price as a volume rollout?

    • That stylised example you cite is NOT an adhoc upgrade — it’s a simultaneous network-wide upgrade to FTTH.

  25. Thanks for fixing the link Renai

    I have started looking at the Liberal document and as the document and the supporting papers are long I will break up my comments into smaller more manageable chunks

    These are the first two things I have picked out from the first summary page:

    “By contrast, under Labor’s NBN wholesale charges per user will triple by 2021.”

    What will triple is the ARPU (average revenue per user). The NBN estimate takes in to account the additional data use that will occur because users will be able to utilise applications that demand large and fast data transfers, something that they can’t do presently. No attempt is made to estimate the change in ARPU for the Liberal Party Broadband policy so a true comparison can be made.

    “We will resolve the greatest failure of current broadband policies: the up to two million households and businesses across Australia that cannot get basic fixed broadband after more than five years of Labour government.”

    I think that those two million households are probably the same who had the same problem when the Liberals were in government. The current NBN broadband policy will ensure that every Australian will be able to access the fast, reliable, ubiquitous broadband service that they choose. The failure is being addressed in the NBN roll out. By contrast the Liberal FTTN project will not necessarily deliver reliable speed or reliable ubiquity because of the possible defects in the copper network.

    • > “We will resolve the greatest failure of current broadband policies: the up to two million households and businesses across Australia that cannot get basic fixed broadband after more than five years of Labour government.”

      The other great fault with NBNCo’s rollout. Anyone with the slighted amount of knowledge could tell you where to find the suburbs with poor infrastructure – the ones built after 1970s, yet in Adelaide Labor have chosen to overbuild the HFC network first to eliminate competition. Telstra meanwhile have been installing new phone towers in areas where the NBN is rolling out.

      • Labor is building new infrastructure, the Liberals will reuse the crappy ones you mentioned. So, Labor is, in actual fact, addressing the fact that the old infrastructure is close to end-of-life, while the Liberals by and large ignore it.

  26. The crux of the near term plan is to deliver 25Mbps to all users in the period between 2014 and end of 2016. But this must have the mother of all disclaimers if they insist on relying on HFC, wireless and satellite to fill the gaps between the FTTP and FTTN networks. Even then, it’s a massive ask to rollout that many cabinets in 2 years. The other take home is that I don’t see how it’s going to be cheaper for those stuck on HFC.

    Sounds like a bait and switch to me.

  27. Well, just listened to a bit of MT on 7:30…one of the take away points I think is that he said that they did not cost for the purchase of the last mile copper, he thinks that Telstra will just “give it to them” under the current NBNco deal…hmm. I think that this will not be the case at all…seems like a good time to become a telstra share holder.

    • > Well, just listened to a bit of MT on 7:30…one of the take away points I think is that he said that they did not cost for the purchase of the last mile copper, he thinks that Telstra will just “give it to them” under the current NBNco deal…hmm. I think that this will not be the case at all…seems like a good time to become a telstra share holder.

      The deal with Telstra is another example of Labor’s superior negotiation skills at work. The significant increase in Telstra’s stock price is ample evidence of who has the better side of the bargain. Two things to remember – significant parts of the ducting may not be required any more and for the last kilometre, Telstra may not need to perform as much maintenance.

      • Matthew, the deal NBNCo did with Telstra was a good one. NBNCo had a fallback position if the deal fell through, unlike MT who has no fallback position if he can’t cut a deal with Telstra to take ownership of their copper.
        If you think Telstra is going to just give their copper to MT just because he says they should you are dreaming. Telstra’s board are legally bound to act in the interests of the shareholders, so they couldn’t give the copper away, even if they wanted to. They will negotiate from a position of strength and they WILL screw a top price out of ABBOTT’s government.
        If MT seriously thought Telstra would give him their copper for nothing he would have said so in his policy document. He didn’t, and they won’t.

        • they don’t need to buy the copper off telstra.
          the end user will lease it with a monthly line rental, in addition to their internet connection.

          just like they do now for ADSL.

          • If MT thought that was a possibility he would have said so. He didn’t because he doesn’t.

          • They’d still need to do a formal agreement, they couldn’t just “start using” Telstras CAN…

            Malcolms plan is full of the usual Liberal financial black holes (though not as bad as Joes $70B one last election).

          • Fantastic, is the cost of line rental worked into the equation of what it is likely to cost the average user?

            What effect is that likely to have on the current USO telstra has? Will a new one have to be negotiated? Will Telstra be expected to have increased obligations to ensure quality connections and will they accept this for no additional monetary benifit?

    • The Party for Business, invest and profit have stated that under the current NBN Telstra has stated their copper is worthless as redundant.
      I always thought the basic principle of commerce is that a product or service is worth what the customer is prepared to pay. The copper will now have a value, Telstra as a listed company has a legal obligation to obtain the best value for it’s assett which is still in situ in Telstra’s Pits and ducts which will still need to be leased.
      Telstra’s shareholders rightly could and would sue the Board and management if they failed to achieve the best value for them.

      The question of the maintenance of that copper has to be adressed. Telstra has a massive organisation with Depots and stores across the country and thousands of staff just maintaining/fault repair of the copper.
      So is all of this part of the package that the NBN will have to take over.?
      Or will the NBNCo Mk2 just lease the copper as fit for service including maintenance and fault rectification, considering the USO of that copper is currently just for voice, but will now have to be for 25Mb VDSL – so what price?

      I suspect rather than buy and add to Capex, just pay a very substantial lease and just add to the opex that is being conveniently ignored. Capex and Opex to 2033 more than likely similar or greater overall cost with a much reduced earning capacity, especially poor as many thousands will have been FORCED to pay many thousands on top for the better service of FTTP which greenfields and new developments will get for FREE.

      The old Carnie con skilfully executed

        • It funny, many of the previous arguments that the classic anti NBN crowd have made in the past can now come back to bite them… as such they don’t appear to be around or commenting at the moment…. or they have adopted new handles to use in this next stage of the debate.

  28. > I think that those two million households are probably the same who had the same problem when the Liberals were in government. The current NBN broadband policy will ensure that every Australian will be able to access the fast, reliable, ubiquitous broadband service that they choose.

    If they can afford the cost. NBNCo are predicting 50% of connections on fibre at 12/1Mbps because that many people consider it not worth an extra $5/month to double their speed.

    > The failure is being addressed in the NBN roll out.

    NBNCo will create a digital divide in Australia that is far deeper than the current divide and based purely on ability to pay not need.

    > By contrast the Liberal FTTN project will not necessarily deliver reliable speed or reliable ubiquity because of the possible defects in the copper network.

    For 50% of Australians connected to fibre, the Liberal project will deliver double the speeds at less cost. For the other half the direct fibre model looks like being significantly cheaper than Labor’s model when you consider that NBNCo are predicting less than 5% will have 1Gbps in 2028 and the wholesale cost for 1Gbps is $150/month ($1800/year).

    • Still on your one trick pony hey Mathew. Still don’t get the idea of conservative estimates?
      Sorry you can’t look at reality where only a very low percentage are taking up 12Mb, so they are happy to pay that extra $5 you are saying they won’t spend. In fact a huge number are taking up 100Mb plans.
      Give it a rest will you.

      • “so they are happy to pay that extra $5 you are saying they won’t spend.”

        Indeed. The facts speak for themsleves too. 20% on 12mbps and a whopping 43% on 100mbps so they are not just willing to pay $5 more it seems. MM wrong again and owned in all holes by facts.

      • > Still on your one trick pony hey Mathew. Still don’t get the idea of conservative estimates?

        I’m surprised that anyone except for a Labor politician could state that NBNCo Corporate Plan contains ‘conservative estimates’. NBNCo keep revising down targets and keep missing them.

        > Sorry you can’t look at reality where only a very low percentage are taking up 12Mb, so they are happy to pay that extra $5 you are saying they won’t spend. In fact a huge number are taking up 100Mb plans.

        Let’s see how the percentages work out when they disconnect the copper (if ever now). I’m still tipping that more than predicted will simply abandon a fixed line altogether.

        > Give it a rest will you.

        The dreams for FTTH are disappearing because the NBNCo speed tiers mean the fundamental advantage of fibre doesn’t exist. I realised this years ago. You might eventually realise it.

        • “The dreams for FTTH are disappearing because the NBNCo speed tiers mean the fundamental advantage of fibre doesn’t exist. I realised this years ago. You might eventually realise it.”

          They certainly will disappear with the Coalition’s $30B white elephant, where if you can’t afford the fibre, you don’t get it….

          And you continue to ridicule the current NBN as being socially inequitable… really?

        • “I’m surprised that anyone except for a Labor politician could state that NBNCo Corporate Plan contains ‘conservative estimates’”

          You are talking about take up speeds. The take up of higher speed tiers has been much higher than expected. Few people are taking up lower speeds. You choose to keep ignoring this.

          “Let’s see how the percentages work out when they disconnect the copper (if ever now). I’m still tipping that more than predicted will simply abandon a fixed line altogether.”

          Yes, let’s see. You are entitled to your predictions. I will take the predictions of the likes of Telstra and other people in the industry that are used as the basis of the plan, not someone like you with an obvious agenda.

          “The dreams for FTTH are disappearing because the NBNCo speed tiers mean the fundamental advantage of fibre doesn’t exist. I realised this years ago. You might eventually realise it.”

          What does that have to do with me asking to stop saying the take up of 12Mb plans is 50% when it’s about 12?

        • The dreams for FTTH are disappearing because the NBNCo speed tiers mean the fundamental advantage of fibre doesn’t exist. I realised this years ago. You might eventually realise it.

          Mathew, you do realise that it will actually be worse under the Coalition plan, don’t you? All the speeds the coalition are talking should have “up to” in front of them, that’s just the way copper works. Many factors effect the speed that the copper connections will get (distance from the node is one of the big ones, once you get to 500m from the node, your already looking at 20Mbps, not 25).

          With FTTH, you’ll get what speed you pay for, with the Liberals FTTN you might get what speed you paid for…or you might get a lot lower…

  29. Holes in the background information:

    1. Assuming labour costs will decrease over time. (pg 14 of background)
    The coalition modeling assumes that installation costs, which are predominately labour will decrease according to a 10% discount rate. That’s a very high rate given the current 3.25% 10 year government bond rate and the later assumed 2.5% inflation rate. In fact, given that average weekly earnings (4.5%) are increasing faster than the bond rate, it will cheaper to immediately install the FTTH to save on labour costs rather than wasting money installing FTTN now and paying higher construction costs in the future for FTTP.

    2. Are new houses equivalent to permanently higher maintenance costs? (pg 16)
    The NBN business plan includes capex for continuing green fields construction given it’s current mandate, as well as IT systems and .
    MT claims that this is less than the copper line maintenance (at only $750M estimate) and hence no financial gain will be made from decommissioning the copper.
    This seems to be comparing apples with oranges, given that there are no enduring green fields capex in his plan.

    3. Would you never pay more for streaming tv? (pg 22)
    MT claims that the share of wallet used for fixed line communications will never increase from a deliberately low level. The revenue assumptions used in the background modeling do not reflect the current subscription speeds disclosed by IINet and assume no additional revenue streams such as streaming services which can cannibalize pay TV services. MT relies on stock analysts for these revenue assumptions rather than the “narrow base of evidence” called actual subscription rates.

    5. $4k for everybody! (pg 24)
    MT assumes based on share analysts that $4k is the cost of FTTP, rather than the costs that NBN co are actually incurring based on signed contracts with the installation contractors.
    There is no hard evidence to substantiate this claim and it seems deceitful to claim it, especially considering that MT could put a question on notice to NBN co in parliamentary committees, which will ask if the existing contracted rates for FTTP installation are consistent with the capex projections of the NBN business plan. That he hasn’t asked that indicates that he isn’t interested in the facts of the matter.

    Given these gaping holes in the anaylsis of the NBN co business plan, this seems to be a case of find the biggest number possible.

    • The coalition modeling assumes that installation costs, which are predominately labour will decrease according to a 10% discount rate.

      Pure nonsense. The modelling makes no such assumption.

      it will cheaper to immediately install the FTTH to save on labour costs rather than wasting money installing FTTN now and paying higher construction costs in the future for FTTP.

      This particular statement betrays the fact that you don’t know understand the numerical example at all. Malcolm’s stylised example (which demonstrates the role of opportunity cost) is clearly expressed in real terms. You could re-express the variables in nominal terms and factor in inflation, and the results and conclusions would still be the same. (This is because the inflation adjustment factor appears in both numerator and denominator and cancel out.)

    • 2. Are new houses equivalent to permanently higher maintenance costs? (pg 16)

      From page 16:

      $10.5bn of capex. $4.5bn for greenfields subtracted out. Leaves $6bn over six years, or $1bn annual rate.
      Malcolm is right — this is greater than $750m annual copper maintenance.

      It’s an apple apple comparison.

    • 3. Would you never pay more for streaming tv? (pg 22)

      MT claims that the share of wallet used for fixed line communications will never increase from a deliberately low level. The revenue assumptions used in the background modeling do not reflect the current subscription speeds disclosed by IINet and assume no additional revenue streams such as streaming services which can cannibalize pay TV services. MT relies on stock analysts for these revenue assumptions rather than the “narrow base of evidence” called actual subscription rates.

      Malcolm is talking about FIXED-LINE REVENUE at the WHOLESALE LEVEL. All these pay-TV services and subscription revenue you are talking about is revenue received at the RETAIL LEVEL in terms of RETAIL VALUE-ADDED. None of this money goes to NBNco.

      The fact that NBNco’s REVENUE INTAKE at the WHOLESALE LEVEL increases exponentially makes it incredibly hard for RSPs to provide RETAIL VALUE-ADDED PRODUCTS because all the growth in total revenue is gobbled up by NBNco in the form of RISING WHOLESALE CHARGES. What’s left over to acquire content and pay royalties?

      • You mean that these Value added services won’t require higher speed brackets, or result in higher traffic volumes?
        Will 25 megabit be enough for everyone always?
        Won’t the higher usage of these services require a higher spend on the wholesale provisioning of the required capacity?

        Perhaps you don’t quite get that with the NBN, you get what you pay for. I’m fairly sure that people will pay for a more useful internet, as they are already voting with their wallets where they can. (see previous iinet articles.)

    • MT assumes based on share analysts that $4k is the cost of FTTP, rather than the costs that NBN co are actually incurring based on signed contracts with the installation contractors. There is no hard evidence to substantiate this claim….

      NBNco refuses to divulge the FTTP cost for passed premises incurred so far despite many questions posed by Turnbull, Birmingham and other Liberals on NBN Committee.

      Macquarie Bank and Deutsche estimates are done by highly-paid analysts with industry contacts who specialise in telco research and distribute their research to savvy, intelligent audience of global institutional investors. They are not amateurs.

      • Oh you mean the slide on page 97 of the latest parliamentary report, which shows the cost progression, as discussed by MT on 30/10/2012.
        http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=jcnbn/./report4.htm

        That shows the NBN range of costs for deploying FTTP, roughly. The Hansard transcript does give the $1200-$1500 per premises range in an actual answers to MT from Mark Quigley. So that does seem to be the actual costs there in an answer from the NBN co.
        I look forward to your apology.

        Regards Deutsche Bank:

        Appeal from authority:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

        A logical fallacy where you declare that since someone important says something is true, it is true.

        I’d feel better to be able to check the working of the report when it comes from an organization like Deutsche bank. Their maths weren’t that good a couple of years ago with that CDO thing, and I guess it’s a “trust but verify” situation now.

        • Read page 98-101:

          Additionally, the NBN graph provided to Parliament does not in fact provide a comprehensive estimate of per premise costs for NBN Co’s FTTP. Rather it is an estimate of costs across a portion of the fibre network – the local network and distribution network; in layman’s terms, what it’s costing to get fibre from the exchange to the street corner.

          NBNco is only providing the cost data for the “FTTN portion” (or fiber to street corner) of the FTTP build! What a JOKE!

          The figures thus exclude the capex associated with running fibre through the lead-in conduit (or overhead from a pole) or equipment and installation costs associated with terminating the network at the end-user premises.

          They are refusing to divulge cost data on the highly laborious individual trenching to each premise from the street plus NTU installation (which cost Telstra a full day’s worth of two technicians at each premise in South Brisbane) — these two cost components account for approx. two-thirds of the cost of a FTTP build!!!

          Running fiber down a street is relatively cheap…. it’s hooking up each premise from the street plus at-premise NTU installation that’s the killer cost component!

          The bottom line is that Australia’s largest infrastructure project in history is a black box. The Gillard Government and NBN Co are simply refusing to disclose the actual evidence on deployment costs that must surely exist in robust form after running fibre past 82,000 premises. Taxpayers funding the project have every reason to question why they would not be provided with this data.

          Hope you learnt something tonight!

          • “They are refusing to divulge cost data on the highly laborious individual trenching to each premise from the street plus NTU installation (which cost Telstra a full day’s worth of two technicians at each premise in South Brisbane) — these two cost components account for approx. two-thirds of the cost of a FTTP build!!!
            Running fiber down a street is relatively cheap…. it’s hooking up each premise from the street plus at-premise NTU installation that’s the killer cost component!”

            You don’t seem to quite understand the process here.
            NBN is buying the lead in conduits as part of their agreement with NBN.
            (see page 27 of the explanatory memorandum for the telstra NBN agreement here http://www.telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/download/document/tls795-nom-em-voting.pdf )

            This means little trenching will be needed as the optical fiber drop will be passed through the existing conduit.
            But lets not interrupt your rant with legal contracts and model this part of the cost at your worst case outcome.
            $50/hr techs using 14 worker hours per drop gives $750 per drop cost. Adding $1200 for the NBN costing you have already accepted as accurate still leaves MT overestimating costs by $1500 per customer. So by your logic and information, MT lied by more than $15 billion for his background information. Thanks for your confirmation.

            It’s hard for me to accept that an organization that publishes it’s business plan, releases financial reports, has submitted comprehensive information to the ACCC, and appears before a parliamentary inquiry under parliamentary privilege every six months is a black box. True, I would like NBN to meet the quarterly cashflow and operations reporting requirement and continuous disclosure requirements equivalent to those for listed companies, but Parliament doesn’t normally grill listed companies every 6 months.

          • So, you finally concede NBNco hasn’t divulged the full FTTP costs per premise passed as you falsely asserted.

            Glad we got that sorted out!

            (Have fun shifting the goalposts all over the place and putting words in my mouth. I’m done.)

          • No, I just modeled the higher costs to humor you, and point out the excessive assumptions in MT’s modeling.
            I happily concede the capex figures are poorly disclosed, for the simple reason of enabling compeditive tendering for NBN contracts. If you told a business what you expect its contract price would be, why would they bid any lower than that cost.

            And if I can use words in your mouth to try to put facts in there, as opposed to truth. I’m guilty of that.

  30. Besides the cost of owning the copper (which the policy assumes will be very low), another unknown is how many premises will need to be FTTP due to irreplaceable copper.

    These are two areas where the coalition seems unjustifiably optimistic.

  31. 2. Are new houses equivalent to permanently higher maintenance costs? (pg 16)

    From page 16:

    $10.5bn of capex. $4.5bn for greenfields subtracted out. Leaves $6bn over six years, or $1bn annual rate.
    Malcolm is right — this is greater than $750m annual copper maintenance.

    It’s an apple apple comparison.

  32. I love all this left wing B.S. Some of us ot here in the regions (not suburbs!!! actual country!!) only have access to B.P Wireless ($60/Month) slow and unreliable. Current ALP NBN plan for us, LOL……never probably. Cmon you idiots. 4 years, 100,000 homes connected and approx 10,000 paid up subscribers!!!!!! I could have hooked up more homes by myself with a ute, some cat5 a hand full of routers and a bloody shovel!!!. Someone made the comment that the world is laughing at the MT plan, If they are they sure as hell are not involved in the private business sector. I have a funny feeling that most of the world had a good giggle when they saw what the ALP was proposing RE NBN in 2007/8. Stop spouting generic socialist rubbish, read the paperwork associated with the new NBN plan then come back and comment. I wont be back here though. I love it when all the lefties get together to agree with each other….Did it make you all feel better??? Anyway I better get some sleep so I can get up and work another 12 hours in my private sector business, pay loads of tax so you bohemians can rake your dredlocks and go to uni…… Me I reckon I,ll join the local branch oh the Luddites.
    Cheers.
    Simon

    • I love playing “Simon says” too.
      Feel better?
      You gave me a laugh. Sweet dreams, Simon.

    • Thank you for your right wing rant.

      Interesting how many liberal supporters are gracing us with their presence. HQ must have ordered the troops into action.

      It is nice to see how much political love can blind one’s judgments.

      BTW, it always makes me laugh when I hear people calling Labor voters “socialists”. It shows one of two things. Either they have no idea what socialism is about or they are so far to the right that they think that whoever disagrees with them can only be socialists or communists.

  33. This snippet, courtesy of The Australian (hope fair use means this is OK Renai) sums it up for me.

    “The Coalition’s broadband plan would offer a minimum 25 megabits per second connection, and speeds of up to 50 megabits per second for the majority of Australians, compared to Labor’s promised 100 megabits per second network.

    Mr Turnbull said the network would be capable of generating substantially the same revenue as Labor’s NBN, which he claimed would cost up to $90 billion.”

    If people cant see whats wrong with that (half the speed, yet generating the same revenue) then you’re never going to get through to them.

    • If people won’t accept the cold hard facts that NTT in Japan has to lower FTTP pricing to ADSL levels to attract any subscribers at all, and ARPU of FTTN and FTTP networks in the US are very similar…. you’re never going to get through to them.

      • Using an example from Japan isn’t a good example, it’s selective example.

        NBN has to transition from Copper to Fibre, what Turnbull is trying to do is fudge the numbers to try and make it look like his policy will make it profitable, when in reality it will not.

        • Using an example from Japan isn’t a good example, it’s selective example.

          Classic!

          ex·am·ple [ig-zam-puhl, -zahm-]

          noun

          an instance serving for illustration; specimen: The case histories gave carefully detailed examples of this disease.

          Yes, buddy… all examples are by definition selective…. they are instances selected for the specific purpose of exemplifying!

          This is too much — I gotta go lie down now.

          • I dont mind the Japanese example GT, its fair enough. My point was that the Liberal plan is pretty much saying “We’ll give most of you something that only delivers half the speed of Labors NBN, but you’ll pay the same price”

            Look at the comment. Most people will get 25 Mbps in a couple of years, then most will get 50 Mbps. Versus Labor’s 100 Mbps.

            The next line then points out that the 50 Mbps capable network will still generate as much income as the 100 Mbps option, somehow suggesting thats a good thing.

            How is paying the same for something half as good EVER a good thing?

            If Japan has to subsides connections, so be it. Labor’s NBN is doing the same, and so will the Liberals. It’s nothing new. But its also deceptive to suggest that this will be necessary as time goes on. At some point, we’re going to need more than 100 Mbps as a standard, and FttN wont be able to deliver.

            My opinion is that that point is going to be sooner rather than later, and at a time where it will be too late to upgrade FttN (if its even possible), so we’ll end up falling behind again. For great cost.

            You’re welcome to your opinion, but if you cant see how $50 Mbps for $50/month isnt worse than 100 MBps for $50/month is a bad thing, then your one of the people I’m refering to. And before you go off on a tangent, the $50/month is a random figure. Make it $100/month if you want, the same argument applies.

      • > If people won’t accept the cold hard facts that NTT in Japan has to lower FTTP pricing to ADSL levels to attract any subscribers at all

        http://i.imgur.com/sCvttuV.png

        Well, then the cold hard fact is that whatever pricing worked in 2003 or 2004 seems to have done the job and the recent price reduction NTT did, for example, had not much to do with DSL at all.

  34. Just thinking about the coalition “plan”. It should be called the “lucky dip” plan.

    You might be a winner if

    – You get the NBN before they get their hands on it.
    – If you live in a greenfield estate
    – If you live somewhere were the copper is beyond repair
    – If you live in an area already earmarked for wireless or satellite

    The rest will be losers, unless you can afford an upgrade and that upgrade is technically and economically viable.

    How much fairer than that could the coalition be?

  35. I like how Turnbull said “You can’t predict the future with great certainty”, and yet in 2021 most users will be selecting the 12mbps plan. This despite 42% of lucky few who have access to the current NBN paying for 100mbps.

    • I guess he is saying 12Mb as the his network isn’t capable of the speeds that are actually predicted for 2021.

      • Through a simple doubling of needs every two years, by 2025 we’re going to be eyeballing needs of 1 Gbps…

  36. There are a lot of the old (non RIM) simple one line voice sharing pair gains in our area and I presume most everywhere , so how is the FTTN solution to be provided to those on these type of pair gains who btw also cannot get ADSL and would be a priority under the Coalition plan ?

  37. best comment i’ve seen so far was on the age website , where someone called the coalition policy “a FRAUDBRAND policy”

    liked that alot …

  38. So should enough people in a neighbourhood opt to pay for their own fibre connection, will they actually deploy a node if only 10 homes can be connected to it or would they fully fund FTTP?

    What is the threshold before deploying a node can be considered waste? I’m fully aware that deploying a FTTN solution is waste but this needs to be realistically considered.

    • I can see the regional people rubbing their hands in glee now.
      They’ll get FTTN automatically (100% coverage by 2016?), and with the (vague) promise of only $5000 to have FTTP to their property, it’ll be a lot cheaper than getting the current FTTP extended ($10,000 estimates) out to their properties in lieu of wireless or satellite.

      • I don’t think the regional constituents have quite yet woken up to the fact they’re going to cop a massive shafting with this Liberal policy. They’ll be left in the wilderness once again.

        When they do you can pretty much count on every single vote in those regions going to either the Independents or Labor (the Greens appear dead in the water).

        Still, I’ve posed a tough question because if you do get 60% of people in a node coverage area prepared to pay for fibre it will make it pointless to deploy a node (because it will be underutilised).

        The question then is if you do decide to fully deploy FTTP to that area, do some get it free and those that are prepared to pay for it do in fact, pay? Do you make everyone pay? What if someone can’t afford it? Do they then get absolutely nothing?

    • The elephant in the room, as with current take up rates being associated with existing contracts, I believe those choosing to pay for fibre will not do so prior to the activation of the FTTN for them, but rather later at random timings and as properties change hands, so very expensive ad hoc once off fibre runs , how many before the pipe is chockers, what then?. Telstra often installed replacement cable whils’t leaving the old cable in the pipes so many local pipes are already close to capacity, so what happens if the fibre cannot be run or worse existing copper cable sheaths are damaged allowing water ingress into the cable, suddenly renting power pole access and running arial individual fibre for one property at a time or run sheathed multi stand cable with no real idea whare the next fibre customer will be located.

      Practical reality evades some

      • My understanding is that NBN Co are paying Telstra so they can use the ducting right up to the premises. I don’t think that using the ducting is going to be a major problems. If there is a problem it is no different to what is already being experienced.

        One of the nice things about fibre is that water doesn’t worry it because there is no electric signal used.

        To do what Turnbull is suggesting will require that the nodes are capable of handling both fibre or copper on the D side the same as is being used in the UK for the BT roll out which he is in love with. I would think that this will make them more expensive than ones that only handle copper. What they are capable of achieving on the copper as far as thru-put I don’t know.

        You are right that the cost of providing an individual fibre link from the Node to the premises on a demand basis has got to be more expensive than providing the fibre connection to all the premises in an area in one go. It is also totally inefficient from an engineering point of view because you are going to have to do a set up and disrupt the community, even if minimally, every time you want to put in a new fibre connection. Blood stupid I say.

  39. For fear of sounding like a conspiracy theorist the Coalition’s clunky, some users-pay broadband policy is a half-baked attempt to stem the tide of consumers drifting rapidly from mainstream media. Political futures rely on stifling factual information flow – particularly the Coalition’s. Yesterday Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull demonstrated neither is a techno-head and neither is interested in offering Australia any genuine communications revolution now or in the near future.

  40. The question people have to ask themselves is… do you want 25+Mbit/s in the next 3 years or do you want to wait 20 years?

    Because the NBN with the current contracts paying the current levels of money is connecting around 2500 new premises a month. At that rate it will take NBN Co over 300 YEARS to connect all of Australia.

    Unless of course NBN starts throwing bulk amounts of money at NBN. In which case it goes down to 15 Years and $90 Billion dollars.

    FTTN is ready to roll, quick to implement and provides up to 80Mbit/s RIGHT NOW (BT Telecom delivering these speeds as we speak)

    Lets get this thing done and worry about upgrading it down the track.

    • Where do you get 20 years from when even the coalition says 11 years?

      > Because the NBN with the current contracts paying the current levels of money is connecting around 2500 new premises a month.

      I’m pretty sure that the contracts don’t say that they’re paying that money to just connect 2500 new premises a month.

      > FTTN is ready to roll, quick to implement and provides up to 80Mbit/s RIGHT NOW

      It’s not ready to roll, it still takes 6 years according to the coalition themselves to implement and provides a 25 Mbps baseline guaranteed for 100% of premises by 2016. Which is just about the biggest load of crap ever.

      • Also, that 25 Mbps requirement will likely be met by just dumping it on satellite no matter the contention.

        > Lets get this thing done and worry about upgrading it down the track.

        Let’s spend $30 billion on infrastructure with limited capacity when the ABS just said yesterday that downloads are increasing 35% in six months and worry about the prudency of spending that money “down the track”. Talk about burning money.

    • You mentioned previously the so called FttN FUD, but now mention a fabricated $90B (which just happened to justify the 1/3 FttN cost claims – how about that) as having credence, really?

      • Alex,

        NBN are currently doing 2500 premises a month. This is not FUD, this is FACT.

        You say it won’t cost more, yet won’t be late. Well REALITY CHECK, it’s going to be decades late at the rollout pace it’s currently doing. Why is it going so slow? Because they can’t get enough subcontractors to do the work. Why can’t they get enough subcontractors? Because they aren’t paying enough. How do you fix this? Pay more money.

        So here are your 2 options…

        1. Keep paying the same amount of money to contractors, no budget blowout… NBN to be finished in 300 Years on current roll out rate

        2. Pay bulk more money so that tens of thousands of more subcontractors are hired, NBN to be finished slightly late, massive budget blow out.

        These are your two options. There is no keep the same budget and increase amount of subcontractors. It’s not an option and NBN’s roll out numbers show this and will show this again come July when they miss their New-new-new-new target of 220,000 Premises by 50%.

        So tell me which is it… quick and expensive or slow and cheap?

        • “So here are your 2 options…”
          Which are both BS and FUD

          How about letting the contractors get up to speed on the rollout. Of course every job you do you are an expert at the day your start? No, projects have learning curves.

          “These are your two options”
          Well sorry, not buying, not giving you a job, your ability to think is too limited.

          • When Labors NBN misses it’s new-new-new-new target of 220,000 by around 50% I expect you to come to your senses… the “ramp up” is a myth… you can’t ramp something up that is running at 100%.

            There aren’t enough sub-contractors doing the work, what you are seeing at the moment is the maximum pace of the NBN unless huge amounts more money is spent.

            The only other option is letting in 10,000 people in on 457 Visa’s to pay the rates that NBN plans on paying these contractors…. oh wait… thats right, Gillard shot that one down a few weeks ago with her western Sydney rant.

          • It is not the truth that hurts, it is you. This is not a political forum where you try and enlist people to the coalition cause. Be a good boy, go back to HQ, tell them you tried you best but they’re not buying. And also, get rid of that crystal ball, it is not working properly.

            And while you are at it, have look at the reaction, from most quarters, to NBN-anorexic proposed by MT . Most people, including MSM, which have strong coalition bias, are calling a lemon.

          • “it’s new-new-new-new target of 220,000 by around 50% I expect you to come to your senses… the “ramp up” is a myth… you can’t ramp something up that is running at 100%”

            It’s far from running at 100%
            It’s a long term project in it’s initial ramp up phase, there will be issues. Better to solve them than waste $30B on technology that is out of date before it’s completed. It’s like buying a rusty old car to replace your rusty old car for 75% of a new car, it’s false economy.

            “There aren’t enough sub-contractors doing the work, what you are seeing at the moment is the maximum pace of the NBN unless huge amounts more money is spent.”

            Not enough contractors doing the work, isn’t that what NBNCo is saying itself? More contractors does not mean more money, it’s the same money with quicker completion. The contractors simply not got enough people on the ground and working. Whether it’s 500 people for 2 years or 1000 people for 1, the cost is the same. The mythical man month may apply to some IT projects but not pulling fibre, parallelism does not reduce efficiency.

            “The only other option is letting in 10,000 people in on 457 Visa’s to pay the rates that NBN plans on paying these contractors…. oh wait… thats right, Gillard shot that one down a few weeks ago with her western Sydney rant.”

            If you think $38 dollars an hour isn’t a good rate for semi skilled labour, and $65 odd bucks for a cable splicer is too low you need to get out into the real world. Of course Graham Lynch would agree with you, but that’s his job.
            http://www.commsday.com/blog/comment-question-marks-over-pace-of-nbn-rollout

        • Once again the $90B, that part I mentioned, is FUD and on an evidence based forum is contrary to the rules…

          For example, I can do it too… FttN = white elephant, taxpayer waste, it will blow out to $60B, as a GBE will be mismanaged…

          Sound familiar, it is FttP FUD, simply rebadged for FttN… I can’t prove it, but you can’t disprove it… ah the wheel has turned.

          Good luck ;)

          • Alex I will stop using the $90B number if you can tell me how many premises will be passed by July.

            Because what I’ve been seeing from NBN is shockingly poor management and if you are gullible enough to believe them on their rollout predictions you are gullible to believe them on their costings.

            I’ve been claiming for a long time now that NBN has been running purely on spin with very little results. I’ve been around too long to simply believe what someone writes down on a piece of paper.

          • It doesn’t matter how long the build takes, the contractors are on fixed price contracts and if they don’t lift their game they’ll lose money, not the nbn co!

          • I wonder what your aim is here. Do you seriously believe that your baiting of people is going to convert them to you misguided point of view?

            Wouldn’t your time be better utilised if you were to find like minded LNP devotees to talk about how great Malcolm is and deplore how misunderstood you all are.

          • So you’ll only stop lying if I read the tea leaves…?

            Strange… anyway…

            None of this changes the fact that the Coalition’s broadband alternative is unbelievably expensive for an outmoded and inferior network, which covers less users.

    • Perhaps you should change you name to Bullshithurts. It would sound much more appropriate

    • Actually, the question you should ask yourself is are you happy to have a Liberal government spend $30B dollars on a system that will offer the same speeds you can currently get?

  41. Watching the video i could not be struck by how much they looked like a bunch of used car salesmen trying to sell a deal that too good to be true….. like some near new car but with a rusted clapped out engine……

    Sad its the policy they should have had 12-15 years ago…..then all we’d be talking about is upgrading the last mile….

    I almost expect Doc Brown to show up with the DeLorian and them wave us goodbye saying wish us luck we’re off to visit John Howard in 1999 with our NBN plan……

      • I just listened to the entire 20 minute presentation (thanks for the link).

        Three brief observations:

        1) Listening to all the FTTN scaremongering in that presentation, you’d think FTTN was a novel and untested technology with zero track record of being implemented successfully anywhere… when in fact, it’s the DOMINANT NGN UPGRADE PATH undertaken by giant telcos all around the world!

        2) His vague references to benefits and costs (with clear personal technical prejudice towards FTTP) were very wishy-washy with little logical rigour… some allusions to arguments in favour of building FTTP now are fallacies which have been debunked in LNP NBN Background Paper…. typical engineer-mindset always focused on “technical specs deliverables” such as Mbit/s as opposed to ECONOMIC VALUE CREATED RELATIVE TO COST INCURRED which is the only relevant factor in economic policymaking….. if engineering geeks want the fanciest, most expensive toy to play with, pay for it yourself! The average Mom & Dad taxpayer funding the damn thing doesn’t care about this sh-t!

        3) As usual, the Telstra BOGEYMAN plays a big part in his scaremongering narrative…. let’s face it, Simon Hackett is foremost, a first-rate businessman and regulatory politics rhetorician… everything he says publicly is driven by his primary imperative to protect the value of his financial interest [before in Internode, now] in iiNet… the fact is, from a competitive and strategic perspective, Labor FTTH is better for iiNet than FTTN…. but who cares about iiNet… NBN policy is about looking after interests of taxpayers, not private shareholders.

        • You really do suck at comprehension, seriously take your LNP tinted glasses off and try being objective for once!

          And before you accuse me of being an alp fanboi, I’ve been voting for 20 years and only voted alp twice in the entire time!

        • So you spent 20 minutes listening and can’t address a single point he made about the FTTN, but attack him instead?

          Nuff said I guess…

          • It’s typical libtroll behavior!

            The current rusted on LNP supporters are proving to just as stupid as the yank tea-party followers!

  42. “It is worth remembering that the only reason Labor proposed FTTP is because they made a complete hash of FTTN and needed something else”

    This is a total fabrication. If anyone made a hash of it, it was Telstra. Furthermore, Labor was advised that FTTP was the smart way to go. So, don’t try to reinvent history to suit your argument.

    “Finally, I guess by attempting to tar me with a coalition brush you are acknowledging that you cannot argue against the Liberal plan on merit.’

    Is this the best you can do? I didn’t realise that showing your preference for the coalition was tarring. The reason I made this comment is simply because for a long time you have pretended not being against FTTP when it is quite obviously what your political colours are.

    As for being able to argue with you. Why would I waste by time trying to repeat what others have already said. You, however, do not seem to have any problem rehashing the same selective, and often disingenuous points. What is you aim do you think that if you say it often enough we will start to believe you. This may work for politicians, insofar as people don’t care enough to found out the truth but I don’t think it is going to work here. I think you will get more respect if you are honest about your position.

  43. Given that the Coalition have said they will prioritise areas that currently do not have cable access , could someone publish the maps of where cable is available ?
    In Perth Metro there is no Optus cable and I also do not think there is much Telstra, certainly nin ein our suburb but is in the next one .
    Be nice to see the maps. I have tried hard to find on the net but so far nix.

  44. Soooo….the Libs plan is to spend $30B (and probably a lot more after sorting out Telstras CAN access) to build a system that delivers speeds we already get?

    Nice one Malcolm, you’ve excelled yourself this time…

    • Please stop spreading FTTN FUD.

      FTTN is doing 80Mbit/s Downloads and 20Mbit/s Uploads on BT right now.

      It’s not as fast as fibre, but if you want it you can get it.

        • Correct, but it’s certainly not “the same speed as we have now”

          This line is being spun all the time when it’s clearly BS if the node is on your front lawn.

          I heard a FTTN FUDster on News 24 yesterday saying that if you get 5Mbit/s on ADSL2 you might get 6Mbit/s on FTTN which is clearly FUD because the Node will be much closer to your house.

          • I love the new catch phrase FttN FUD… beautiful.

            We have heard it all from the FttP FUDsters… everything from white elephant, to the cost will triple/quadruple, it will create social inequality and all FUD stops in between.

            Guess what?

            Everything people such as you have said about FttP can also be said about FttN… only thing is, with FttN being obsolete technology, it’s only FUD in relation to FttP, it is actually relevant in relation to FttN.

            Ah Karma…

          • Mark Gregory was talking so much NONSENSE on ABCNews24 yesterday. Making stuff up throughout the whole interview.

          • The only folk making stuf up are LNP stooges with words like “truth” and “god” in their alias’s trying to make the LNP NoBN policy look better than it really is – so do us all a favour and get lost!

          • @Renai apologies for attacking “the man” above but im sick and tired of LNP stooges trying to tell the community of ICT professionals that the LNP’s policy is good technically and good for this country when it’s clearly a 2nd rate attempt at winning votes!

            This would have been a great policy to take to electorate back in 2007 but this is 2013, wake up LNP supporters and see that your emperor is stark raving NAKED!!!!

          • Actually, nothing much has changed from a few weeks ago, except that now the Liberals have an actual policy document and their plan’s cost has already increased from “~$15 billion” to “$29.4 billion”.

            The way they are going, it could be something entirely different in another few weeks (Maybe 1Gbps over string for $2! Nah, not really, but I expect the cost side to blow out a lot more as Labor found out with the original Labor FTTN NBN plan….which is why they did the switch to fibre in the first place).

          • I never said FTTN was the best technologically, but it certainly is the most deliverable.

            NBN Co has missed every single target it has ever set for itself and thats because it’s rollout plan was made in the world of make believe.

            Short of hiring 10,000 cheap fibre splicers and cable layers on 457 Visas(never gonna happen under Labor) it will never be able to be rolled out on time or on budget.

            FTTN on the other hand simply requires all those little Telstra Pillars you see all over the place and upgrading them with a powered FTTN Node Cabinet. This needs maybe 2 people max node cabinet install versus the 10,000’s of thousands of workers you would need just to meet the 6200 new premises connected per day target under the fairy-land FTTH NBN.

          • I was talking about one of these:
            http://www.zdnet.com/photos-inside-telstras-nodes_p5-1339293663/#photo

            Being replaced by one of these:
            http://www.zdnet.com/photos-inside-telstras-nodes_p2-1339293663/#photo

            This is much easier than stringing fibre optic cables to 6200 houses a DAY. The Cabinet installer doesn’t need to move… they sit there… on a seat… and patch in the phone cables into the node cabinet.

            There is no need to dig up peoples gardens, string fibre optic cables up power poles, string them over to a house and wire it to the inside of the house…. 6200 times every single day.

            They simply sit on their little chair and wire it in. This is why FTTN can be rolled out so much sooner.

          • You are stuck in the past mate, this is the 21st century and we WILL need FTTH!

            As Tony Windsor says “do it once do it right do it with Fibre”

            and btw, in many cases the copper will be used to pull the Fibre thru to the house in the existing PSTN ducting and no gardens will need to be dug up – NBN Co already has permission from Telstra to do this!

      • What FUD? it’s in their plan, introduce 25Mbps and if Tony gets a second term he’ll increase that to 50Mbps.

        Not sure what BT has to do with it, they didn’t mention BT in the plan at all that I could see.

  45. There is one thing I am trying to get my head around.

    MT has stated that when copper cannot be used for whatever reason, FTTH will be used instead. Yet, no one really knows how much of the copper network will be suitable for FTTN. Therefore, no one really knows how much more expansive the coalition plan could be. One thing is sure, Telstra is unlikely to tell MT how much of the copper is unsuitable for FTTN at a time when it will be trying to maximise how much it can extract from MT.
    MT, the eternal optimist, stated last night that he thought he could get the lot for nothing. This has to be the ultimate in wishful thinking. Why on earth would Telstra be so kind, knowing that the acquisition of copper is essential to MT’s plan. After all no copper, no FTTN.

    • And what are NBN’ers having such trouble understanding that Telstra is being paid $11 Billion dollars by Conjob to decommission(aka rip up) the copper?

      IF the Coalition stops the Fibre roll out and leaves the copper in place guess how much Telstra gets? Come on… engage brains here everyone. They get NOTHING.

      So now they have a choice. Get nothing for their copper network. Or get the same $11 Billion they were going to get from Labor to rip out the copper.

      Telstra ONLY get paid once people are migrated over to the Fibre network so there is no economic difference to them between the coalition and labors plan.

      This is common sense.

      • And I suppose the Coalition gets to use Telstra’s copper for free? They will have to pay regardless of whether they decomission the copper or keep it in use.

        • Did you bother to just read what I wrote?

          Labors NBN is paying Telstra $11 Billion dollars for their copper network to be decommissioned.

          The Coalition are paying Telstra $11 Billion Dollars for their copper network to be decommissioned.

          Where are Telstra handing over the copper for free?

          • Geez you’re naive!!!!

            Telstra value their PSTN at around 18 Billion dollars, they will want more money for the copper which is entirely their right – they could sell the copper for scrap if when it’s no longer required and make some money out of it (see the copper scrap prices!).

          • “IF the Coalition stops the Fibre roll out and leaves the copper in place guess how much Telstra gets? Come on… engage brains here everyone. They get NOTHING.”

            First of all, you may want to cut out the arrogance. You don’t appear to be the genius you think you are.

            The coalition cannot and will not stop the roll out. So, stop inventing things. Telstra will get something and its is the other way around, if they don’t sell the copper is it FTTN goodbye and hello again FTTP.

            In reality, Telstra must be salivating at the prospect of negotiating with the coalition. It would be like someone wanting to buy your old bomb because it has parts they need desperately to built a vintage car they have already spent all their savings on.

          • Indeed Observer…

            It has been mentioned by those now suggesting Telstra (as granted Thodey has indicated) will only want $11B… when questioned previously about private enterprise.. It is law for all CEO’s of all companies to do everything in their power to ensure the best return for shareholders, or they can be legally held accountable.

            Now if the Coalition are elected and Thodey does the sums to find that the copper is actually worth in-excess of $11b after all, to use these people analogy… he will be breaking corporations law, by not “demanding” more to “supply” it… (to use the old private enterprise theme of supply/demand)…

            Perhaps the Coalition are lucky in one aspect…Sol and Phil aren’t still at the helm.

      • Labor paid for the use of the ducts, not the copper. Under the Labor plan, the copper has no value, but under the Liberal plan, that copper has lots and lots of value…

      • That presumes that copper itself has no value, which is not true. Paying Telstra to switch users to fibre allows Telstra to remove and sell the copper at a price. If Liberals want both Telstra’s customers AND Telstra’s copper, the value of the transaction will have to be higher.

        People should stop being political in every argument and start thinking for themselves.

      • I thought Labor’s $11b was to get access to the pipes, and to subsidise people moved over to fibre when the copper is decommissioned in an area. Not a cent for the copper itself, thats still Telstra’s.

        The Liberals need to a) keep the access to the access pipes, and b) now get some level of control or usage of the copper. So if there is a contract worth $11b for the first part, why would they give the second part away for nothing?

        You are wrong when you claim that Telstra is being paid $11 Billion dollars by Conroy to decommission(aka rip up) the copper.

  46. “And what are NBN’ers having such trouble understanding that Telstra is being paid $11 Billion dollars by Conjob to decommission(aka rip up) the copper?”

    Telstra are being paid by the NBN for use of their ducts and pipes, the migration of cutomers to the NBN network and the change to USO. There is no compensation being paid by NBN for the acquisition or decommissioning of copper or for anything else to do with the copper.

    Telstra owns and controls the copper and if the Coalition want to use it they are going to have to negotiate a deal with Telstra in addition to the deal for the other things already made by NBN Co. Is it so hard to understand that the NBN Co has no interest in the Telstra copper and it has no value to NBN Co under the current roll out. Everything is fibre. They are not about to pay Telstra for copper that is of no earthly use to themselves. If the Coalition NBN plan comes to fruition then the copper does have a value to the NBN Co and they are going to have to pay Telstra extra to use that copper.

    This is the reason that the Coalition will suddenly back down on their NBN plan and suddenly decide that it is too expensive to change to a FTTN roll out. (Just blame Telstra for your woes) I just hope that all the rusted on Coalition supporters wont get too upset with being mislead and then abandoned by the Coalition front men (again).

  47. I hope that Renai is logging and correlating IPs against address ranges allocated to Parliament house. I would be fascinated to see who the sock puppets are that data…

    • It is a sad factor of human nature that some people will shill voluntarily. Not only will they do it voluntarily, they will do it obsessively.

      When someone has that kind of mentality, I wonder what the odds are of them sticking closely to reality?

  48. Just for some relevent articles re rollout issues facing the NBN

    One that will be common to both and reflects on maintenance practises of Utilities, especially privatised once whose priority is shareholder dividend.

    http://www.afr.com/Page/Uuid/73e84736-9da9-11e2-8e9e-71133f2a0e18

    The desire to have the NBN partially fund the repairs and infrastructure maintenance they have scrimped on as cost cutting.

    Telstra

    http://www.afr.com/p/technology/telstra_repairs_holding_up_nbn_rollout_ZCq502yd3achkJPEhb5ZjJ
    http://www.afr.com/p/business/chanticleer/telstra_the_big_winner_in_turnbull_KXQPZ101Tg291bEq30Ui9J

    A mix of factors including the relatively new bulk use of ribbon fibre and the lack of SUITABLY skilled splicers, skills will be gained and it will be a musch quicker and more cost effective technology than sheathed cable fibre.
    Plus of course the issues of inability to rollout full fans due to Telstra remediation of only parts having been completed, fragmenting the rollout and losing the bulk efficiencies, costing the contractors and subbies big dollars and time inefficiencies, leading to disinterest by splicers and subbies in doing work for the NBN. Not the pay is too low, but paid on work done, sitting around twiddling thumbs and waiting doesn’t pay the bills

    http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_contractors_fail_to_deliver_V1Z0n1N80KvXhvWd8e45cL
    Many other articles on these piecemeal rollout issues.
    Plus it has been obvious by the polls that the Libs will win, so massively reduced demand for splicers and splicing equipment. Foolish for Contractors or subbies to spend resources training, buiding and equipping teams of splicers

    I wonder if once the Libs are in power whether many of these issues will just go away or cease to exist

    • It will be hard to tell – the press (outside the specialists) will do no investigations and churnalism will reign. With Murdoch as a major holder in Foxtel the collusion between News Ltd and Telstra is unarguable, the Fin Rev/Fairfax is a business hagiographic society and the IPA have wrested control of the news and current affairs agenda at the ABC.

      So objective news reporting in Australia will be a thing of the past… other than independents on the web of varying quality.

      Australia is heading down a dangerous path with all this.

  49. One other fun factor I am seeking to clarify is re Telstra’s POTS, I noted in the LNP policy document in reference to the HFC the terms Broadband AND telephony were used, with FTTN obviously the exchange is the first node and I assume a POTS service will be available if required on HFC, as with all FTTN services (depending on the Telstra deal, may be compulsory) . This would necessitate Telstra maintaining all their ageing telephone exchanges for a diminishing customer base as more customers opt for Mobile phones or VOIP. – will the POTS service remain regulated or allowed to recover costs or subsidised by the taxpayer. ?

    Plus less customers being cut over due to HFC, less payments by NBN to Telstra.

    Plus stated HFC WILL be open access – whether true open access or just a wholesale/reseller basis. Even then in the spirit of the competition that the LNP so fiercly promote there can be no DPI limitations or service limitations by Telstra over what their competitors offer over their HFC network, iView, Netflix, Quickflix, whatever, any VOIP service must be able to be provided, even competitors to Foxtel and Sky

    Plus maintenance of the copper to VDSL standards rather than just voice.

    • Telstra HFC was never designed for POTS for obvious reasons but Optus HFC was, although it is only enabled in Sydney and Melborne iirc.

      • Optus has indicated they are not interested in continuing to operate their HFC, it will need heavy node splitting and upgrades, all rather expensive, what bribe’s will be needed to change their mind. ?

  50. The “choice at a glance” table is full of complete bullshit, and you have to be an absolute mongoloid to swallow that crap as being in the least bit factual.

  51. In 2010, the Coalition’s broadband policy would cost 6 billion dollars. In 2013, the Coalition’s broadband policy will cost 30 billion dollars.

    That is FIVE TIMES THE COST in only THREE YEARS.

    In 2016 it is clear that the cost of the Coalition broadband approach will likely cost 150 billion dollars.

    lol.

    • Wanna see something even funnier?

      Work out the Liberals plan to a “per year” average Vs Labors.

      Clearly the Liberal NBN is more expensive :o)

  52. Tony Abbott said “that most Australians would find their internet speed more than adequate under the Coalition.”

    Reminds me of the quote: “640K is more memory than anyone will ever need on a computer.”

    • Or the quote which was *allegedly said by the president of IBM, Thomas J. Watson in 1958: “I think there is a world market for about five computers” :)

      *like some other great quotes from history, there is some doubt from historians he actually said this line verbatim, but its become a famous and funny quote attributed to him all the same.

      The funny thing is we know for sure Malcolm has said 25mbps is “more than enough” for any application. So that qoute will absolutely come back to bite him on the arse in less than ten years. It’s a matter of science that we will outgrow _any_ artificially low boundaries placed on Internet speed, as our bandwidth requirements exponentially grow.

  53. can we have a compilation of the best twitter #fraudband posts?

    i did love the one saying Milli Vanilli were the original Fraudband…

    • “If you think you’ve got demand coming in 30 years time, the time to make the investment to meet that demand is maybe in 29 years time or 25 years time,” he said

      Oh please, does he seriously think FTTN has ANY chance of being viable for 30 years? I think he’d be very lucky, make that extremely lucky if it had 10.

      • Exactly, you just have to look at the other places that have tried FTTN to see what’s happend to it’s future :|

      • Oh please, does he seriously think FTTN has ANY chance of being viable for 30 years?

        No, he doesn’t, which is why his own personal money is invested in FTTP…

        • Yes, ignorance could be forgiven, but deliberate and ongoing deception isn’t, especially the vitriole that comes from him when called on it. I think, for me and others, Turnbull has shit the bed. He was at one stage my prefered PM, now I see him as someone I wouldn’t trust at all.

      • What do you do if you think there is demand coming in 6-8 years and the current proposal is expected to take 6?

        History shows that as capacity increases, products are introduced to take advantage of those capacities, and push the boundaries. If they didnt, we wouldnt be having this conversation. And those boundaries being pushed arent 30 years away, they are less than 10.

        My personal argument isnt whether FttN meets our needs of today or not, it clearly does. Its that it wont meet the needs of 2 years after its completed.

        Its an incredibly consistent growth rate, backed up by history up to and including today. So why on earth do people think that growth pattern is going to just up and stop overnight?

        • Look, I totally agree. Seeing the technologies out there now in Asia and technologies that will be available before 2020, FTTN is just not able to support them, end result, we don’t get them, while other countries do.
          By then it’s too late and we take 8 years to roll out FTTH, all the time getting further behind the rest of the world, not being able to do things accepted as normal elsewhere. After those eight years we pay way higher prices for broadband because we are still having to pay off the wasted $30B the Coalition will waste on technology that is a dead end.

          • Oh, sorry bud, if it looked like I was arguing against you, I wasnt. I was pointing out that provable history suggests that nationwide we’re going to need more than what FttN can deliver very soon, possibly before its completed.

            12 Mbps now = 100 Mbps in 2019, and getting close to 1 Gbps in 2025. And the Liberals expect us to pay for it, when we have an opportunity now to lay the groundwork for those needs for a relatively tiny portion more. If it is more at all.

            I’m in 100% agreement with you, I was just pushing it a little further.

          • Here’s another way you can look at what your both talking about:

            82% of all new network investment world wide is in FTTP (including Malcolm Turnbulls own money), only 18% is in FTTN. The reason the Libs are going with the 18% is for political reasons, not technical or financial ones…

    • Thanks for the link!

      That was a great listen — really enjoyed listening to Malcolm directly calling Steve Dalby on his corporate self-interest propaganda BS.

      Frankly, if Malcolm Turnbull never entered politics, I can’t think of any other Liberal (or Labor) politician who has a similar capacity to discuss both the technical and economic issues surrounding the NBN debate in such an eloquent but accessible manner to the public — especially the ease with which he cuts through the BS being pedalled by all kinds of vested interests and ignoramuses.

      • “That was a great listen”

        Indeed, it was. Very enlightening. Win by brute force rather than wit. That ethos is part of them and explains why Turnbulls fraudband plan follows the same clumsy logic, it’s not smart or efficient like the proper NBN plan.

        • My favourite bit is when he says:

          “Would you be prepared to put your money where your mouth is?”

          I wish I was there to see the facial reaction.

          • It is quite evident that you are trying to stir us (in a juvenile sort of a way).

            I have got news for you it isn’t working.
            To show you I have no ill feelings towards you, I will share a secret with you.
            The human brain does not wear out the more you use it.

            I truly hope this really helps and liberates you to once again attempt to use it.

          • “I wish I was there to see the facial reaction.”

            No need to be there, I can hazard a guess, like me he probably thought Turnbull was a complete dumbass… and let’s not forget where Turnbull put his money!

          • That was truly pathetic, MT resorting to the old bluff and bluster tricks and trying to apear correct by bullying!

            Poor form Malcolm, you now have <0 Credibility!!

          • My favourite bit is when he says:

            “Would you be prepared to put your money where your mouth is?”

            Like when Malcolm put his into French FTTP? Yeah, thats sooooofunny :o)

  54. The following section from P12 of the Coalition policy bothers me:

    “NBN Co and Telstra
    We may seek to negotiate variations to commitments to provide efficiencies, allow the NBN to be more quickly deployed or otherwise create benefit.
    NBN Co will seek permanent access to Telstra’s copper between premises and concentration points such as pillars, cabinets or exchanges. Telstra has publicly stated the copper has minimal economic value, leading us to anticipate cost-effective access will be attainable.”

    Re the first part: What variations to what commitments will they try and negotiate? This very vague statement could allow the Coalition to give all manner of concessions to Telstra as part of a deal. Will they be anti-competitive deals? We are not told.

    Re access to the copper: Telstra’s copper only has minimal economic value because it will become redundant under the Labor FttP plan. Under the Coalition’s FttN plan it suddenly has greatly increased its value. As I’m a Telstra shareholder I will expect David Thodey to get the best deal possible from our coper’s enhanced value. I will most annoyed if he tries to give it away, as Malcolm told Leigh Sales, on 7:30, he expects.
    Coalition policy only commits them to ‘seek’ permanent access. So Telstra holds out for a price better than zero (as they should).
    Then what?
    Does the Coalition throw its hands up and say “OK, we tried. It looks like we can’t deliver the FttN we promised” and things stay the same as they are now (and as Tony Abbott always wanted), or does it offer lots of sweetheart, anti-competitive deals to Telstra instead? Either way, Telstra wins (great for shareholders like me) but the public loses.

    Anyway, MT can point to his policy and say he didn’t deceive us. His escape clause is on P12

  55. Gosh Abbott claims that with FTTN you will be able to download 3 movie videos at the same time what he failed to mention was if they were streamed video you would not be watch them with a smooth un-interupted delivery.

    When I had ADSL/2 given my location from the exchange the best performance off-peak was between 1 and 2 MBPS the ISP claim was at least 20 MBPS [subject to this that and the other] even with FTTN and the same copper network between 1 and 2 MBPS is probably all that one could expect. Having converted to Cable I now enjoy on average 50 MBPS.

    The performance of the network is simply going to be determined by the weakest link and that could simply be any point in the network between the server and the client.

    In the case of the Liberal policy in respect to NBN it is more than likely to deliver to some no better performance than what they are currently experiencing.

  56. Hey everyone, it’s gotten a little feral on here over the weekend, so I’m closing the NBN threads for now. I’ll re-open new NBN threads on Monday after everyone’s had a bit of a chance to calm down. If you want to continue to debate this stuff right now, there’s always the forums.

    Cheers,

    Renai
    Editor + Publisher, Delimiter

Comments are closed.