news The Opposition has backed comments by upstart Singaporean telco MyRepublic that the Coalition’s preferred Fibre to the Node technology is “shit”, despite acknowledging that its new National Broadband Network policy currently under development may feature the same technology.
Earlier this week, MyRepublic CEO Malcolm Rodrigues — which is on the cusp of launching in Australia — reportedly told Fairfax Media that the FTTN component of the Coalition’s Multi-Technology Mix version of the NBN was “shit” and that the current Coalition Government had “completely stuffed it” in terms of its policy model for the NBN.
MyRepublic provides its services in Singapore and New Zealand primarily over the all-fibre networks that those countries are currently rolling out, based on the Fibre to the Premises architecture. This is the same architecture that Labor’s previous version of the NBN used. However, the Coalition has significantly modified this model to incorporate in some areas the technically inferior Fibre to the Node and HFC cable models — which do not deploy fibre broadband all the way to homes and business premises.
The Opposition immediately leaped on Rodrigues’ comments, with Shadow Communications Minister Jason Clare issuing a media release noting the view of the MyRepublic chief executive.
“Singaporean broadband provider, MyRepublic has delivered a scathing assessment of Malcolm Turnbull’s NBN, labelling his fibre-to-the-node technology as “shit” in today’s Australian Financial Review,” Clare said at the time. The Labor MP added that this “damning criticism” of “Malcolm Turnbull’s Fibre to the Node technology” came after Internode founder and NBN company director Simon Hackett had said in March that FTTN “sucks”.
“Malcolm Turnbull talked a big game on the NBN,” Clare said, “but now all his promises are starting to unravel. He promised that the rollout of his second-rate fibre-to-the-node network would be at-scale a year ago. He has failed.
He promised every home and business would have access to 25 megabits per second by the end of 2016. He will fail to make that happen. He promised that the NBN would be built for $29.5 billion – he has failed. He now says it will cost $42 billion. The NBN is rolling out slower than Malcolm Turnbull promised. It is also more expensive than he promised, and according to the experts all many Australians will end up with is a “shit” network that “sucks”.”
Following Clare’s comments, a number of Delimiter readers pointed out that Labor had flagged it would pursue a “two-step” process for deploying the NBN — meaning that its own NBN policy would be likely to initially support Turnbull’s FTTN technology and then support upgrading that technology to a full Fibre to the Premises rollout in the long term.
In the wake of these comments, Delimiter invited Clare to respond to this issue.
In response, the Shadow Communications Minister said: “Labor is committed to ensuring that all Australians get fast, reliable and affordable broadband, no matter where they live or do business. Wholesale prices should be the same, whether people live in the city or the bush, and broadband should not be made more expensive for those Australians who can least afford it.”
“Fibre is the end game,” he added. “A National Broadband Network for the 21st century will be rolled out across Australia, but because of the Coalition’s limited vision, it will now need to be built in two stages rather than one.”
“We are working on our NBN policy now. We are consulting with the experts and we will announce the policy closer to the election.”
opinion/analysis
What we are seeing here is the gradual development of a very difficult situation for Labor.
On the one hand, Labor is faced with the unfortunate reality that it probably does not want to completely revamp the NBN project once again if it wins the next Federal Election. It does not want to spend another two years renegotiating another $13 billion deal with Telstra. It does not want to spend another two years getting the ACCC to approve such a deal. And it does not want to have to go back to the NBN company’s many contractors and rejig their operations to support a universal FTTP rollout, rather than the planned Multi-Technology Mix.
However, on the other hand, Labor is also aware that the Australian public really does not lke the HFC cable and FTTN mix that Turnbull has injected into the NBN. It must provide a point of difference between the two parties for the purposes of the election. At the moment, it appears as though that point of difference will be a commitment towards extending the MTM NBN into a long-term FTTP rollout.
This is all pretty much as I predicted in my article on this topic a month ago. Labor is basically being forced into this position by the lack of bipartisan support on the NBN, and the reality that you simply cannot stop and start $40 billion infrastructure projects after every election.
However, it does lead to uncomfortable situations like the one Clare is in this week. If Clare attacks Turnbull’s MTM too much, he will leave Labor exposed to difficult questions about Labor’s own support for the FTTN and possibly HFC cable infrastructure.
From my point of view, Australia’s politicians are currently facing a stark choice with respect to the NBN.
Realistically, what will most likely happen is that the two major parties will both largely support Turnbull’s MTM policy, with the caveat that Labor will also support a long-term upgrade to FTTP. This will please few people, but will be the only likely chance of achieving bipartisan support on the NBN.
The right choice for Australia’s long-term interests, of course, is something completely different. Both major parties, if they were being honest about Australia’s future needs, would support the NBN returning to its universal FTTP model. This is the outcome I support. Delimiter’s Principle 2 states: “Where there is a choice of technologies to be implemented, we support the option that will be the best fit for purpose in the long-term.”
By supporting any other model than universal fibre, both parties are short-changing Australia. And it is incumbent upon us to remind them of that. If we don’t, then perhaps our neighbours from Singapore — who are already enjoying full FTTP — will.
As for our other sizable party, the Greens? On paper the Greens do support a FTTP NBN. However, they’ve been relatively absent from the debate this week and over the past few months. One wonders how much fuss they will make about a fibre future for Australia as we lead up to the election.
Image credit: Parliamentary Broadcasting
>> the reality that you simply cannot stop and start $40 billion infrastructure projects after every election
well, the reality is that this is just what the coalition have done.
Supposedly nbn is still free to choose the technology to use. What fraction of premises will they have actually started work on by the next election ?
I think it’s more about the deal with Telstra than the construction effort.
But they have explicitly stated that the current deal with Telstra allows nbn to choose the technology in an area. There is even an “area switch” program to allow individuals/groups/regions to pay to get the type of rollout they want in their area.
I believe with the current MTM they could replace FTTN with FTTP once they start using HFC they have to maintain all of it even if they stop using it because of the new Telstra deal so Labor may have to use the HFC part.
http://www.nbnco.com.au/connect-home-or-business/technology-choice-program/area-switch.html
No reason the federal government couldn’t choose an area switch for any area which they haven’t started building.
Regarding the HFC, overseas HFC operators are starting to hook up new customers using fiber to the HFC node.
Note it says so in theory Labor could work from there, perhaps provide half the funding to state governments to switch.
HFC has always used fibre to the node, that’s what the “F” stands for”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_fibre-coaxial
Effectively, HFC and FttN are the same thing, it’s just that HFC uses coax from the node to the house instead of copper.
Or did you mean they are running fibre from the node to the house?
They could do that but the problem with the Telstra deal is that NBN has to keep the HFC going until Foxtel doesn’t need it anymore.
So doing Fibre to the HFC node might help but they got to keep the coaxial running for Foxtel unless they can convince Foxtel to run over the fibre.
The other problem is that Telstra still owns the Fibre backbone of the HFC.
Tinman, I meant that they are putting in fiber from the HFC node to the house. It still looks like HFC from a network point of view, but the signal goes over fiber the whole way. Over time the coax will be removed from the entire network.
But David the problem with the new Telstra deal is that if they cant get Foxtel switched over to fibre and they have to keep the coaxial going until when Foxtel doesn’t need it anymore.
I think David is right, apart from some logistical issues (like what contracts are “set” for equipment) it’d be easier for Labor to switch over to FttP than what it was for Malcolm to set up his….whatever it is…
I think people are just over the NBN completely. They have essentially resigned to the fact that it’s gonna be ‘shit’ for a long time and given up.
The fact that ‘deals’ with telstra are still a thing in itself is extraordinary.
What a mess.
+1
I’m sorry but 30-40 would be sensational for allot of ADSL2 customers. But seriously how many HD videos do you want to stream at once
There’s more to the Internet than streaming video you know! E.g. iCloud, Google docs, oneDrive, gaming services, Dropbox, office 365, and email etc etc
Pretty much everything is moving into the cloud and the average family of 4 now has 20+ internet connected devices.
Why do people always assume that the NBN is all about downloads and streaming. For me, the most important thing is upstream bandwidth, which would allow me to send large files quickly, increasing my productivity and opening up potential new business opportunities with clients overseas. This will not be possible with FTTN. But hey, why on earth would we want to increase productivity and make ourselves globally competitive when we can just rest on the laurels of our never-ending mining boom… oh, wait…
Sure. If you are talking about upload speed.
18 Bruce. The only correct answer to your narrow-minded question is 18. Hope that helps.
*Slow Clap* You made me laugh.
That was the correct answer for Bruce.
Streaming video is today’s problem. Tomorrow’s problems will include
* office in the cloud – your word processor, desktop software, web browser, properly maintained and patched, all in the cloud for $10/month. Never worry about viruses again; that’s the cloud provider’s problem.
* games in the cloud – already appearing in Asia and USA… video games run in the cloud and stream locally. Full access to 1000s of video games for a monthly subscription fee. Also means you don’t need to buy a new PC or games console every year.
* tele-health – already happening in Asia. It’s not just “Skype” so the doctor can speak with you, though that’s certainly part of it. It’s more like having a hospital bed in your home. All your health diagnostics transmitted in real-time.
* distance education – remember the old school-of-the-radio used to teach children who lived in outback Bush locations? Now imagine attending a course in Harvard from your rural home in Tasmania.
There is more to high-speed Internet than “video streaming”. That’s *today’s* use case. The use cases of tomorrow we probably haven’t even thought of yet! What we can do is look at the past 30 years of residential-network access, plot the download/upload speeds on a graph, and observe the bandwidth doubles every 18 months. We’re going to need 100 Mbps by 2020 and 1Gbps by 2025. That’s the current trend and there’s no reason to think we’ve hit the peak in 2015.
You are very right.
Reality is also, that we simply dont know what tomorrows Technology might be, or how we will utilize those technologies. Look back 10 Years ago. ADSL 1 was amazing, supplied us with all the bandwidth we needed.
The Liberal have basically crippled any chance of Australia being a viable competitive front for emerging technologies with this FTN
“I think people are just over the NBN completely. They have essentially resigned to the fact that it’s gonna be ‘shit’ for a long time and given up.”
I think the vast majority just want it no matter the technology used. There must be people like me who could not care less if it is FTTP or FTTH if it gets my connection above the 2.9Mbps I have been living with for years. They could turn around and only promise 8Mbps and I would still be happy that something, anything, is being done.
I disagree, most ppl want bandwidth equality, they want to select the speed that meets their needs and not be told “sorry that speed tier isn’t available as you are too far from the node”.
I’ve experienced this issue first hand myself, the house we rented for the last year and a half had Telstra cable and I was paying for the 110/2.5mbps plan and aside from the rubbish upload speeds it was excellent and meet our family’s needs well.
We moved into our own house a month ago only to find our section of the suburb we are in is dsl only despite the rest of it having HFC and now I’m getting 12/1mbps.
I know for a lot of ppl that would be adequate but for us it’s a pain and very easy to saturate the link just by one person downloading OS updates. Dsl based Technologies simply can’t provide customers with real choices, it’s node lotto that determines the max speed available to you.
The whole point of FTTP is to meet today’s and tomorrow’s requirements while giving subscribers the ability to choose the plan that meets their needs.
@KymBo Thats because you’ve had to live with crap and put up with it (which sucks). Better crap is still crap even if it is better.
We all lived with sub 1500 etc before ADSL2 was invented by T$ after all! ;)
I’m single I’ve a ~10Mbps connection but I struggle at times. I get buffering trying to watch my NFL and its to the point I now pre-emptively go around switching anything and everything off that I can before hand (incase of something simple like an over the net EPG upgrade or patch).
I know someone lucky enough to get 22mb and he’s still has issues as his families grown used to said speeds but when everyone is doing anything altogether (ie wife on FB, kids on YT and he’s trying to work from home ….) basically someone still gets stuck ‘buffering’ and kicked off (or else someone else is has to stop what they are doing).
So true. +1
KymBo it is perfectly ok for you to say you just want something faster and being technology agnostic. I think after all this time most people would probably be saying the same thing – just give me something significantly faster.
However, the biggest problem with that is that the MTM is just not value for money. Turnbulls MTM has gone from 29.5 billion to 42 billion and that still does not include ongoing maintenance costs (power for the nodes, ongoing maintenance of copper and HFC cabling, remediation of pits, etc, etc). Nor does it include the cost of upgrading the FTTN and HFC to FTTP which will need to happen as soon as the NBN build completes (the reality is probably much sooner).
Turnbull has bald faced lied and falsified all figures and conclusions on FTTP yet refuses to provide the parliament or the public any figures at all on everything else leaving us to rely only on what he says. We will have to wait until the change of government next year at least to get any of those details. Turnbull has invested his own money in fibre rollouts overseas yet oddly has massively screwed over this own country and any chance we had of having any digital economy. He has created a country of haves and have nots – those with FTTP and those with either shit or nothing. And because he has locked in long term contracts the ALP have no choice but to continue rolling out the shit.
Probably the most bizarre part is Turnbull signing that new contract with Telstra. Buying their CAN sight unseen without any information on the state of the copper, locking in the taxpayer to pay for all remediation and maintenance, locking in the taxpayer to maintain the HFC for as long as Foxtel wants to use it, etc, etc. Dumbest thing I have ever seen.
Malcolm has accomplished his NBN demolition job as ordered.
But on the bright side at least Foxtel is still being looked after & uncle Rupert is smiling… so likely his continued LNP propaganda support is assured.
Add Optus into the mix as well. I’m still not sure why we needed 2+ HFC networks which overbuild each other so much.
Also I think it’ll be the HFC part which will cause Labour the most headaches. There’s what 2-3 million homes covered by this footprint. I wonder what Malcom is gonna do though when they realise not every home in the footprint is actually connected to said cables (I’ve a friend with a foxtel dish … he’s in one of those former fibre blackspot areas now zoned HFC being his saviour sometime late 2016).
At least FTTN is upgradeable to P with a bit of work (different type of P I believe than the original but still it gets fibre there at least).
“At least FTTN is upgradeable to P with a bit of work”
Even after full completion of FTTN, most of the cabling for FTTP has yet to be laid. That is more than a bit of work. But this important detail is ignored.
Frankly I think the only option for the alp is to brute force the NBN back on track via legislation (Inc POI model) and Telstra and the ACCC be damned.
They also need to bin the prime Contractor model, it simply doesn’t work and just adds extra costs and delays!
The revised agreements with Optus and Telstra will almost certainly commit Labor to the HFC component of the MTM. If it’s done properly HFC might be a good interim solution in the medium term. Labor could also adopt FTTB/dp for MDUs as a good, medium-term, interim solution. That would allow them to focus on stopping FTTN. As I understand the new agreements there is no need for re-negotiation for Labor to switch from FTTN to FTTP. They should make that commitment now.
Actually maybe they shouldn’t. The coalition seem to be contrary enough that they may just try and lock something in to prevent that happening.
I agree tho. Maybe Turnbull’s model for not actually deploying any FTTN before the election was so that he could let Labor turn it all back into FTTP if they win. Especially if he ends up in charge when Abbott gets outed if the election fails.
LOL.. I can dream….
I agree CMOT, just concentrate on fixing the FTTn portion.. I believe the current agreement allows them to switch to FTTH. I mean, how else could they provide area switch alternatives?
Sensible CMOT, if only accepted 6 years ago (bleedingly obvious and actually recommended by their own – thanks Conroy).
Only FTTN now worth fighting? Max 40% of premises, majority of global high speed broadband deployment today, connection savings undeniable, demonstratively (realworld) faster deployment, solid performance meeting customer data demand. P2P on demand where required. Earlier revenues and lower cost likely to see cost recovery in under 10 yrs. Extendible to FTTH if required in the future.
Accepted multi mix for the majority, why not hop out of the way and support faster & cheaper deployment of a solid technology?
Once again Richard you are ignoring that the companies rolling out FTTN own their own legacy PSTN’s!
NBN Co did not own the PSTN in Australia and the reason NBN Co even exists is due to Telstra refusing to rollout FTTN as far back as 2003 (and 2007 and 2009) unless the Gov of the day allowed them to massively inflate prices to customers and even allow them to refuse to provide wholesale access to other ISP’s/Telco’s!
When will you stop ignoring reality?
PSTN ownership wasn’t required for HFC nor FTTB. Today NBNCo own their own PSTN (and two HFC networks), handed over for no more money than Conroy threw at them to decommission. Perhaps Conroy was a terrible negotiator? (red undie hats anyone?)
Many markets have successfully negotiated a seperated retail/wholesale data upgrade. Even the ACCC had with the local loop in Oz.
Conroy’s expensive NBN folly is the reality, unable to be undone but moving ahead in a more responsible fashion.
I congratulate those that have narrowed their complaints to FTTN, a significant victory over unreason and totally unexpected reading this websites comment history. Once the fibre fanboys stop squealing “FTTN won’t work” (ridiculous) all that’s left is speed (connection and data) vs cost. Putting aside Renai’s claim of once in a century upgrade, given the deployment advantages of FTTN for the next ten+ years why not?
Really a great day, long time coming.
Oh very convenient, totally ignore Telstra’s 2 FTTN proposals that the Howard gov knocked back … *slow clap*
“NBNCo own their own PSTN (and two HFC networks), handed over for no more money than Conroy threw at them to decommission”
You mean that 60 year old failing network that NBNCo now ‘owns’ but has no right to maintain, costing taxpayers and reimbursing Telstra extortionate amounts for the foreseeable future? And all for the same price as NOT having to? What amazing negotiation! I’m sure Telstra are really crying over that deal.
“Conroy’s expensive NBN folly is the reality”
That the MTM rubbish being thrust upon us unwillingly is just as costly AND requires roughly the same sum AGAIN to migrate to FTTP in another 5-10 years (as estimated by the SR, Malcolm Turnbull and many other actually credible sources) is obviously a superior solution to paying that cost only once.
“given the deployment advantages of FTTN for the next ten+ years why not?”
Complete waste of money, little to no benefit and a need to waste money again in less time than it took for the Liberal reign of terror that made Australias communications so stagnant that the countrys largest infrastructure project became a need rather than a want?
Derek, Howard had nothing to do with the NBN. If we’re to have a go at that Govt I’m more than happy to.
Howard rightly rejected the “three amigos” new monopoly proposal in 2005/06. The govt, as a major shareholder, should have pushed for the management teams replacement (as should have Conroy). Telstra predictably follows the UK lead about a decade later, BT’s recalcitrance team replaced before their upgrade.
Howard has everything to do with the NBN, he rejected Ruddock’s and the ICT industries recommendations to properly separate Telstra prior to selling it. Howard’s failure to listen is the core reason we needed an NBN in the first place!
Richard
“PSTN ownership wasn’t required for HFC nor FTTB. Today NBNCo own their own PSTN (and two HFC networks), handed over for no more money than Conroy threw at them to decommission. Perhaps Conroy was a terrible negotiator? (red undie hats anyone?)”
Lets look at the deal.
For at least the copper NBN now has to cover the price of an remediation work, Telstra own cost estimate was around $2B but realise was going to cost more than that. That doesn’t sound like its been given away for nothing there.
For the HFC NBN has to keep is running even if they stop using it until Foxtel doesn’t require it and cant charge any more then the agreed price even if cost go up to keep it running. Yep sure sound like they are giving it away.
“Faster deployment, solid performance meeting customer data demand. P2P on demand where required. Earlier revenues and lower cost likely to see cost recovery in under 10 yrs.”
According to the SR its only 3 years faster which works out to be 7 sec faster per premises than FTTP blistering fast but then we where promised that FTTn would be delivered by 2016.
By 2027 it you ad OPEX to the mix will cost the same as FTTP so wrong no lower cost most like high cost.
Can you give just one company that can deliver a MIN 25Mbps on FTTN asking for just one. Even NBN cant in there latest PIR they are only doing a once a day 25Mbps. Shows a real solid performance there. Then being unable to deliver the higher speeds as promised how is it going to deliver a better revenue as well as the highest maintenance cost.
Oh Richard please, just because you claim you could have written the FTTN plan…
(PSTN and HFC) “handed over for no more money than Conroy threw at them to decommission”
Shh don’t mention the $1B p.a. maintenance costs, extra power costs, plus the upgrade costs to HFC, etc.
Meaning the pay TV networks will benefit gratis as these wonder negotiators (ahem) have agreed to use taxpayer funds (yes your precious taxes) to improve their pay TV networks for them… brilliant.
But again I say it, had you been around back when Richard, you would have been the first one to scream (as you do now about copper) that the iron wires are good enough (as Albo said) … we don’t need copper. Yes ironically the very same copper wires you now cling to and say are good enough, you would have, like fibre, refused point blank, to accept.
It’s a wonder you don’t demand dirt roads, zeppelins and cassette players too?
Great day (week. month year) for dumb ultra conservative, backward thinkers.
Cassette players? WTF? Much too advanced Rizz, try a phonograph ;-)
Indeed, we are seeing that demonstratively faster deployment here in Australia too. Just look at all those nodes popping up in the streets, GimpCo should have the rest done in the next 504 days.
This would be an acceptable outcome for most.
I’m not wholly opposed to the HFC component of the build as it will likely save money and be able to meet most consumer needs for the next 10 or so years, if not longer. But FTTN is just a mind boggling waste of money. It can’t deliver guaranteed speeds. It can’t meet the needs of today, let alone the next decade. And it’s going to cost almost as much as FTTP. Crazy.
I’m happy to stay on HFC for the foreseeable future (10-20 years), especially if they fix the HFS system up a bit so DOCSIS 3.1 works like it should…
Another jumped across (2012). How things have changed; FTTB, now HFC. Amazing day.
Richard
Why is NBN upgrading HFC for free when it already meets the requirements according to Telstra while people on FTTN has to pay for the upgrade when NBN are unable to deliver a solid speed as you claim.
The is no “jumped across” Richard, that’s been my stance all along with HFC…as usual, I guess you weren’t actually following along.
The way the new D/A reads is that other than NBNCo is now responsible for remediation, there is no reason not to roll out FTTP. HFC however, I think is here to stay with both the DA and Senate sessions indicating that it’s an ‘all or nothing’ approach. Not a bad outcome TBH. Push for Scenario 4 from SR.
If they are really looking to cut costs, FTTdp. GPON distribution all the way to VDSL2 converters in every pit. Then FoD can really be a reality, and Bill can keep his rose gardens.
Everyone wins.
TLDR: FTTP/FTTB/FTTdp/HFC + LTE / Satellite + FoD = Best outcome for all.
This would be the common sense approach. But since when did common sense ever prevail? Certainly won’t under this current mob.
+1
I think councils should step in here, and as a rate payer i hope they do., if nbn want to start putting node cabinets throughout my area, im sure they can come to a deal to bypass and go FTTP. they just put the rates up 5% and is now around $2000, I havent seen anything been done around here to warrant the rate price let alone the increase.
I suspect an incoming Labor Govt will try to make the best of whatever they have left with. (Or should that be ‘righted with’?)
So not ‘actively’ supporting, rather trying to ameliorate the disaster within the imposed limitations.
Such is the politicized disaster of Australia’s telecommunications landscape.
+1
I believe regardless of the mix, the Australian people would be more optimistic if Labor were in charge of the NBN (and the country) than the Coalition. Under the Coalition I know I will never get my fibre but under Labor I can dream.
I know I’d be a lot more optimistic about everything if they’d replace that idiot Abbott with Malcolm even…
If Labor’s NBN included FTTN, It might just only be in the MDU scenarios where running FTTP is economically challenging, which is perfectly ok.
A true MTM would be;
– 100% reuse of the existing HFC as an interim service where it already exists, but on pricing and quotas determined by NBN (Co). To be replaced by FTTN/P as below once the rest of the project is complete.
– FTTN where the node is actually in the basement or services riser of an MDU serving more than 12 lots
– FTTP to as close to 99% of gov/edu/business addresses employing 25+ and as close to 90% of all other business and residential addresses
– WiMAX to the remaining 8% of addresses with the final 2% covered by satellite
I would like the current government to at least *state* the eventual goal of FTTP. They could easily say that the current plan that goes up to 2019 is stage 1 on the way to a FTTP rollout, which would be coming later but impractical to implement right now. It would not hurt their current plan, it would please a lot of people and it would inject some desperately needed vision into this government where there is none at the moment.
Labor could also do this and it would be a good way out of the quagmire.
If Labor want to differentiate their policy at the next election, just say that electorates that vote in a Labor candidate will get FTTP as the default technology choice. Liberal electorates that prefer FTTN will have their choice satisfied as well. Easy.
“Wally Fandango: I think councils should step in here..” I agree with Wally as does Susan Crawford (http://www.balloon-juice.com/2013/12/27/broadband-as-todays-electricity/) and City of Stirling Councillor David Michael – http://www.communitynews.com.au/news/No-to-node-comes-at-cost/7671736
and then we end up with everything NBN Co was supposed to prevent – Rich councils will build FTTP and poor ones will do nothing.
The problem with the “area switch” program is that it puts all the extra capital cost on the user, but does not refund the lower operating costs. In addition, nbn gets to sell more profitable 100 mb/s plans that they would not have been able to offer to many people under a FTTN rollout.
It’s a great deal for nbn, a lousy deal for everyone else.
It has been pretty much shown by the coalition that Labor were stuffing the NBN up.
I disagree with the coalitions mixed technology approach as a half arsed dogs breakfast which will slow down Australian technology development
But the original rollout plan was flawed.
Labor should have focused on primary locations: cities.
Technologists dont normally choose to move away from the cities due to the technology that cities provide. Which means that a lot of the locations they focused on did not get the uptake that they had hoped
Upgrade the cities first to reach the most people in the shortest time period and in that way, let income provide the money for developing the rest of the NBN.
Herein lies the problem Matthew…
Half the naysayers said FttP is/was a failure because it wasn’t rolled out in the profitable areas where the most dollars could be recouped first. While the other half (to keep the negativity flying high on all corners) said, it is/was a failure because it wasn’t rolled out to neglected (unprofitable) areas, where it was needed most, first.
Then we had others who said, it is/was a failure because there shouldn’t be cross subsidisation (you know, why should I pay $5 more per month to help pay for someone who chooses to live in the sticks, internet) you know, the real thoughtful and compassionate types…
But in reality after some early re-tinkering, the budget was sound, but the roll out was a few months behind NBNCo’s own (aggressive) targets. But of course the naysayers wouldn’t accept the Telstra deal, or asbestos, or Contractor problems as legitimate gripes and a large part of the hold-ups and criticised again.
Damned if you do and damned if you don’t x multiples… when people just want to be critical eh?
But the same naysayers are now where? MIA, of course.
Because if legitimate and not simply on an ideologically motivated crusade, they now really have something to be critical of.
MTM/FttN blown out to $70B according to the Treasurer and two years on and not one node customer in sight anywhere, speaking of behind schedule. And speaking of getting further behind schedule, remember when we were promised “25-50Mbps for all Australians by 2016” (iirc). Now it’s 2020 – so a four year blow out, already admitted to, before they have even started on FttN…
So as you can see, if FttP was stuffed up or flawed or you say… in comparison that would make MTM the most completely disastrous, utterly fucked up and wastefully imbecilic plan, by any government in Australia’s history.
But then they did warn us years ago, that it was fraudband…
Superb post. +1
(498 days to go btw)
:)
Typo last paragraph though, should read, as you say, not or you say… c`est la vie.
Thanks HC
Here’s the rub, the previous roll-out was actually getting up to speed just like Mike said it would, and within the revised costing. Heck, they even found ways to reduce the cost of FttP, which they didn’t get time to implement thanks to Malcolm “The Demolisher” Turnbull.
All covered by Renai, which makes you wonder why some of the folks posting here come here? Are they just trolls that don’t bother reading the excellent articles here, or do they read them and just don’t believe the facts Renai unearths?
I think it’s quite simple Tinman.
“From my perspective/IMO”… I have never corresponded with anyone (and I have literally corresponded with hundreds of naysayers) who haven’t opposed FTTP exclusively because of their immovable political persuasion. Not one, period…
Again IMO, most here support the FTTP NBN and as a consequence, therefore clearly appear to lean Labor/Green, because of this. Whereas the rest here are simply lifelong Coalition voters, supporters, members (dare I say shills) or of course, totally impartial L/libertaians, who are also lifelong Coalitions voters…lol, which is why they must oppose FTTP NBN.
Massive difference in mindset and motive for commenting…
Nice post. I was checking constantly this blog and I am impressed! Extremely helpful information specially the remaining section :) I maintain such info much. I was looking for this particular information for a very long time. Thanks and good luck.
Comments are closed.