blog Almost every person I speak to who works in Australia’s technology sector has a remarkably dim view of what the Coalition has done to the National Broadband Network project, with most viewing the Multi-Technology Mix model as a great example of why politicians should not be allowed to make technological decisions.
However, the heads of Australia’s telcos are often the exception — after a decade of unmitigated chaos in telecommunications policy, what they mainly want is stability from here on in so they can focus on growing their businesses. Thus it hardly comes as a surprise that the head of M2 Group, Geoff Horth, is calling for a bit of bipartisanship on the NBN from here on in. Fairfax quotes Horth as saying (we recommend you click here for the full article):
“… certainty around the way that it’s going to be deployed and the timeframes for deployment is really important for everyone. I think any further change in deployment model would be ill-advised [and] I wouldn’t advocate for any change.”
I largely agree with Horth that things need to stabilise, and at the moment it very much feels like both Labor and the Coalition are largely on board with the current NBN model, where a mix of technologies is being used to deploy the network, even though the two major parties would disagree on what percentage of each technology should be used, with Labor preferring more fibre and also probably preferring to upgrade the planned FTTN network to full FTTP down the track.
However, there is also the fact that the current MTM mix represents an extremely poor technological choice to take Australia forward over the long term. On this basis, I suspect that there will continue to be debate about the issue and that things are not going to stabilise any time soon. That’s the problem with poor policy decisions — they tend to continue to cause anger in the community until they are changed for the better.
M2 Group has vested interests in letting the NBN alone.
M2 Group were also part of the group that tried to buy iiNet.
M2 Group also have their own Fibre network, so obviously feel threatened by the fact if Labor go back to FTTP Rollout, their profits will crush.
So M2 Group is only looking for it’s self and it’s shareholders.
The NBN like some self-vested commentators is a National policy, thus comments like M2 Group should die.
M2 = mmmmmmm don’t touch my company profits too much.
As I mentioned in another article funny how they couldn’t say this before the last election. Bipartisanship indeed. I wonder how things would have played out if we had a few more saying this to the coalition clowns back then. They probably would have been accused by Turnbull of “conspiring against the tax payer”, so considering the MTM patchwork is now costing $56 billion I’d say M2 is conspiring against the tax payer.
A fact? Sorry nothing but an opinion.
If everyone you speak with is negative on MTM then I’d suggest you should expand your circle. Though difficult in Canberra to get much variety of opinion.
M2 Group chief executive Geoff Horth :
“The reality is that a fibre-to-the-node deployment in time gives us a chance to go to fibre-to-the-premise if we think it’s justified,” he said. “[Connecting premises directly with fibre] would absolutely take longer to connect – there’s no way they could build fibre to the premise at the rate they’re proposing to build fibre to the node.
“NBN has been pretty good in the last 12 months and they have definitely got better at timeliness and its provisioning has improved so we’ve definitely got more confidence in its capacity to deliver these days than we ever had.”
http://m.smh.com.au/business/m2-says-lets-not-labor-the-nbn-20151018-gkbuyt.html
Expect slaming of him personally given fanboy response to exactly the same comments (longer, transition to FTTH if required).
Richard NBN own strategic review said it could do it in the same time frame and almost as cheap.
But then the SR only had 7 sec per premises faster than then $71B FTTP.
@Jk From SR13p17 S2 v S6 I get 9.4 sec per premises (3yrs/10m), representing a 30% saving in time. Faster delivery (earlier revenues) and cheaper technology (FTTN & HFC v FTTH) results in peaking funding saving of $23b ($64b v $41b), a 35% saving. Numbers remain unkind to your position.
In the past weeks many have accepted FTTB nor mdus & HFC upgrades. We wait for actual policy detail from Clare but expect the obvious. As I posted weeks ago we’re now left arguing the 30% FTTN, Conroy/Quigley NBNCo failure near universally acknowledge (few fanboy holdouts); worth reflecting if MTM had been utilised from the start the fix line network would be nearing completion (a BT in the UK, Renai’s analysis?) and a saving of tens of billions of dollars.
FTTN won’t work they squeal, a ridiculous position destroyed (if any more evidence was required) by NBN realworld deployments:
https://www.commsday.com/comment-fifield-will-be-the-minister-for-good-nbn-news/
Perhaps Renai can post the report for us all to read together.
In the last 12 months they have gotten better at timliness? what a load of crap, in 2 years they have only JUST started connecting people to their obsolete FTTN technology. They havent even begun trialling HFC.
You quote the SR that has been shown to be a load of crap even by turnbull himself? that uses figures pulled out of thin air?
The statement ” a fibre-to-the-node deployment in time gives us a chance to go to fibre-to-the-premise” has been shown to be very difficult and exceedingly difficult to do. Just have a look at BT in the UK. Therefore you are adding billions to the (approx 59 billion FTTN rollout, to upgrade to FTTP) better just to go straight to FTTP. Also you totally ignore project fox costings.
If FTTN was in reality “fasta cheaper soona” than FTTP why doesnt Fifield release the high level desktop report they have and dont give us that “commercial in confidence” crap since they are pretty much removing FTTP from the roll out entirely.
commsday?? i wouldnt believe a word of any of their biased nonsensical bullshit. ” Well the trial results show that those within 400m of a node will get their full 100/40Mbps. Those within 750m or so will get 50Mbps. That is pretty much everyone in urban areas. The best estimates are that 60% of all Australians are within 400m of a copper node and 80% within 600m.” show me where these figures come from?
Richard go and crawl back under your rock and stop touting the BS LNP line. The future (which is already here) has proven you WRONG!
It’s Grahame Lynch. “Comments are closed” Very reputable unbiased source jake :-)
Two days to go by my clock :-)
@Jake
JK used the SR figures in his reply, I then used then same.
I get it, every source not towing the fanboy line is bias. AFR & Fairfax, Telco CEOs, News Ltd, Renai pre-election, myself. But I read them anyway. Do you have a list of approved publications / authors?
“The future is the present”; classic;)
But Richard you don’t want to use a like for like comparison if they had continued to roll out FTTP could have been done for not much dearer and 1 year later.
well the SR figures are a load of crap. You havent responded to my other criticisms. any publication that doesnt allow users to respond, in my mind, is clearly biased. i didnt mention any of those others, funny you did! I read everything i can to. All sensible logical signs point to the original NBN labor plan as by far and away the best for all australian tax payers and companies.
the future is present if you are looking at the requirements for internet speeds based on the 2k13 SR. In fact with netflix, that baseline is well surpassed. I get upset when they LNP talk about transparency and openness yet have shut down the NBN and limited reports to biased nonsense. I want to know why my tax dollars are being spent on antiquated systems that are taking a lot longer to roll out than previously stated. remember the fully costed and ready to go plan that went from 29 billion to 56 billion??? sounds fishy to me, yet they fail to be more transparent. You may pass me off as a fanboy, but at 1.3million already connect to FTTP and probably <1000 to FTTN and 0 to HFC well, you tell me whats working and what isnt! You still failed to answer any of my other questions richard, or is it that you cant?!?!?!
@Richard, you include Newscorp in that list of news outlets you read. You just lost any credibility at all.
It is quite obvious all Uncle Rupert wanted was to protect his Foxtel interests, which he has successfully done by having FTTP destroyed and getting NBN Co to prop up HFC for as long as Foxtel wishes to keep using it.
Yet you consider them unbiased? I am not commenting on any of the other outlets, just Newscorp. They are as far right as Fox in the US…. Oh wait…
Jake
Richard hates using the SR to compare the CP15
Since the last know figure is they had kept rolling out FTTP is $64B Y23
Vs MTM of $56B Y22
See this is where you made a mistake jake. For the coalition clown plan to make any sense you first have to assume future internet speed requirements will remain static. Those living in the 1950’s know better, listen to them :-)
Indeed HC,
What was it our illustrious PM said sometime back – no one needs or will need any more than 12Mbps (iirc)… then his wonder boys (that’s like us fanboys except they know SFA… :) said we’d only need 25Mbps by 2023 (iirc).
So why all the hullabaloo about g.fast, copper speed improvement, HFC being upgraded let alone that dreaded fibre…? When Mal says 12 and his subordinates argue 25…
Rizz
The CBA said all we will need by 2023 was 15Mbps so we are spending $56B to deliver ADSL2+ requirements
Richard… here’s what your link said…
“A new report, conducted jointly by Ericsson (NASDAQ:ERIC), Arthur D. Little and Chalmers University of Technology in 33 OECD countries, quantifies the isolated impact of broadband speed, showing that doubling the broadband speed for an economy increases GDP by 0.3%.
A 0.3 percent GDP growth in the OECD region is equivalent to USD 126 billion. This corresponds to more than one seventh of the average annual OECD growth rate in the last decade.
The study also shows that additional doublings of speed can yield growth in excess of 0.3 percent (e.g. quadrupling of speed equals 0.6 percent GDP growth stimulus)”
So please stop the incessant lies.
No not having a bad day all Richard…
Proved you wrong multiple times, proved you have at best intentionally misrepresented many times, that you lied about what you claimed in the past (thanks HC) and the best you have is that after umpteen farcical mates reports, reviews and conflicting figures, that I apparently got the timeline of MTM blowouts and fuck ups wrong…ROFL
As for the CP16, well that does make sense it would have the CP16 where they tried to sneak the massive and disgraceful blowout in costs past, in a wad of words ;)… So, unlike some who are never able to man-up, I’ll certainly stand corrected if my details were incorrect :)
After all, unlike you naysayers who thrive on lies, FUD and misinformation, I am here for genuine, truthful correspondence and don’t ever wish to be considered… well TBH, like you.
As such I think we all are shaking our heads as to why you say one thing then contradict your self and then even deny you said one or both…
Regardless, my hearty congratulations Richard. After 5 years of complete failure after 100’s of attempts, you (apparently) finally got me once on a mere time issue – I’m sure you are very proud… LOL.
Pity you can’t provide anything of substance to prove me or others here actually wrong about the big issues, but instead simply parrot the Coalition 24/7 and continually refer to, as your smoking gun, the very doc in question which contains a massive blowout, wrong time blow outs (it’s faster you all say – yet even with the lesser than FttN hold-ups of FttP, my neighborhood would have had FttP, so it isn’t faster)..
Keep trying mate, number two may onlybe a matter of another 5 years away, ironically much like ridiculous FttN.
So Richard 9sec faster to connect copper to a node vs rolling out fibre to the house digging up someone front yard. That must be some slow work connecting copper to a nose.
@JK in the real world teams don’t work seven days a week, 365 days a year.
No industry figure maintains FTTN or HFC upgrades takes anywhere near the same time or money as FTTP. It is delusional to maintain this position.
As with Gregory, claim the additional time & money for FTTH is worth it, but give us some figures.
you show us your figures richard! no one was saying that people were working 24 hrs 7 days. Show us where your roll out times come from! are they independantly audited and unbiased? what about copper remediation? what about HFC remediation, we still dont know the state of these networks Turnbull purchased on behlaf of the taxpayer.
We cant get clear figures from the NBN cause guess what?!?!? they are far less transparent than they used to be.
@Jake
Ah JK said it above with his seconds per premise reply. The replies are response to each other in the thread, you shouldn’t read each independently.
We’re talking actual figures with sources referenced. You’re late to the party, might pay to read past comments.
@jk it doesn’t make sense to compare SR13 with CP16 figures as we know they were revised. Comparing SR13 with SR13 does, CP16 to CP16. This is what comparing apples to apples actually means, opposite of say apples to oranges.
Why do you keep referring to CP16?
There’s been a $15B blow out in costs since then, so equate that across the board and your smoking gun is nothing but a limp water pistol…
But hey when one doesn’t have much to work with, I guess one has to clutch at straws, don’t you mate…
Fair enough keep up the good fight…if nothing else those of us who look forward not backward (wow fancy instantaneous electronic mail eh, which can be sent to multiple recipients, wow… I bet you argued that would never happen)… thanks for the entertainment.
It’s akin to watching some quaint 70’s UK re-run, like what was that guys name… oh yes Benny Hill…
Would you mind if I referred to you as Benny from now on?
Sorry Richard it is apples vs apples.
It’s the last known figures of a full FTTP rollout vs the mess we have now and the price and rollout time are so close it comical.
Remember when you where claiming the $84B y26-28 like Turnbull in the CP15 claiming Labor rollout was even slower which is not what was in it.
“As with Gregory, claim the additional time & money for FTTH is worth it, but give us some figures.”
Oh Richard please. Now you are simply being dishonest) and argumentative) for no reason…
YOU yes YOU (with 2 x shout) gave us the very figures you now ask for, a week or so ago (whoops eh)… yes a new correspondent so lies are all the go eh?
Disgraceful…
Remember this? A doubling of internet speed equated to and increase of 0.3% GDP (iirc).
And every doubling thereafter another 0.3% …
That was from YOUR link. So you tell us if better speeds will be of benefit…?
But no, instead you play dumb (you are playing ;) One must question why anyone would be compelled to do so?
Oh wait… of course.
Richard no industry figures NBN own SR say otherwise
@rizz your misunderstanding of my links was addressed here:
https://delimiter.com.au/2015/09/16/analysts-expect-unchained-turnbull-to-return-nbn-to-fttp-model/#li-comment-701610
@rizz the $5-15b blowout in costs was identified in CP16, not after. They’re the best figures available, you’re welcome to provide alternatives.
Contrary to claims made here I’m uncritical of current NBN performance the blowout was actually predicted here:
https://delimiter.com.au/2015/08/21/criminal-myrepublic-ceo-mourns-loss-of-australias-marvellous-nbn-vision/#li-comment-696572
Having a bad day?
Funny how the only people who seem to want the copper used are those politically motivated or financially motivated for it to be so….
Those who have no motivation either way are able to make a rationally weighted decision and see third rate obsolescence is not good enough.
Being so, I’d welcome the Coalition, M2, Telstra, NBN and other’s such your good self Richard, to join the rest of us here in impartial reality.
@rizz Only those sharing your views are impartial. Got it;)
Perhaps others’ have the financial understanding of expenditure v revenue (the derided “bean counters”), economic inderstanding of costs v benefits (economists), the capturing most benefits at speeds matching demand and of realising universal high-speed internet earlier. Strange convergence of opinion in the last week of those in senior positions don’t you think? Might be some reason to ponder than conspiracy theories.
sure do, you cant get the same revenue on FTTN or HFC that you can get with GUARANTEED speed that you get with FTTP. Upto speeds are not what people pay for. The MTM model is certainly not universal access, high speeds need to be quatified and shouldnt be used as a vague figure for something that is in actuality very specific.
tell me how your rottting copper will get the same revenue that FTTP can without truly ripping off the australian taxpayer?!?! oh you cant.
@jake yes you’re unlikely capture all the potential revenue a lower speeds.
However I’d make to a few points; 1) AR14-15 p28 reports 77% of NBNCo users choosing 25/5 plans or less, 2) wholesale revenue is not only correlated with line speed as demonstrated in the xDSL market (QoS, multicasting, equipment colocation, contention (CVC), etc), 3) NBNCo revenue remains well below breakeven with predicted takeup of only CP16p48 of 49% in FY18.
Costs should be carefully managed to limit the loss to taxpayers (note I don’t believe NBN equity will ever be recovers even with MTM).
ha i like how you say “choosing” because most people are unfortunately not tech savvy enough to get around the 13 or so obfuscation clicks tesltra use to hide the fact that you can in fact get faster speeds by paying for it, so their other connections dont look so bad by comparison. However once they drop around to their mates place streaming 4k netflix and go ummmmm why cant mine do that, then they will inevtiably start questioning WTF. however luclkliy for turnbull and unfortunately for the australian public that wont be until after the election. However if quigleys plan hadve been followed and fiber was upgraded to gigabit+ speeds by 2016 then i bet a number of businesses would have been happy to pay the premium, but again the shit team at LNP decided not to go ahead with this, and limit the potential revenue of the NBN to make the rest of their shit network not look so bad. Your 2nd point makes no sense. and pulling anything out of the corporate plan is like reading used toilet paper. Costs should be carefully managed, but that should be done by doing a proper CBA analysis that Turnbull himself often said he would do by that independent body but failed to do after the election.
@jake a CBA was performed.
I give consumers far more credit, most are very good at maximising their (economic term) utility according to their perception of value. Adam’s famed “invisible hand”. Much better than govt has shown to be spending on their behalf (see Milton Freedman ways to spend money).
Many people don’t see the value in HD over SD, very few interested in 4k video (is this an essential service taxpayers should be funding). Half of residences in current FTTH areas have no connection at all, likely to increase when CAN cutoff but it’ll not be near 100%. Some don’t value the internet, others prefer celluar data.
@richard
You clearly have no clue what a legitimate CBA looks like then do you?
How can you honestly call it a genuine CBA when it completely ignored its likely most profitable and needy customers … Businesses!
Once again you expose your liberal blinkers that won’t let you see reality!
FWIW I spent a couple of years as a business customer delivery manager for an ISP so yes I do know what business need when it comes to comms!
Ah yes the CBA…
Would that be the very CBA that when I copied and pasted their findings at another thread (remembering Vertigan panel were sent there by Turnbull on a mission) which found that Quigley’s FttP figures were actually pretty damn good…?
So you told me…
Those figures can’t be taken seriously as they were sourced from NBN/NBNCo?
So the shinning light Cost Benefit Analysis… where you and the panel largely (or completely) ignored the actual benefits and which err, according to you the costs can’t be taken seriously is what, an analysis?
I’d suggest if that is in fact the case, that it also lacks the yssis, too, which would make it ?
@Richard, those people might be choosing 25/5 now, but what about in 5 years time? 10 years? 15 years? When they’re still stuck on the same speed because copper advancements come when you have shorter and shorter copper.
G.Fast? They aren’t going to be able to roll that out without first rolling out more fibre/nodes so that everyone is within roughly 200m of a node.
But your lovely CBA said we’d only need 15Mbit by when was it? 2020?
Despite a household of 4, all possibly doing multiple things on the internet simultaneously, being able to saturate 15Mbit right now.
Fuck future needs, amirite? Let future Richard worry about that, Present Richard is worried about an $8bn difference over a 10 year project…..
Answer one simple question please Richard…
If FttN was fraudband in 2007 (when it was current) why isn’t it now?
@rizz when did I call FTTN fraudband?
@richard, you may not have, however your ideological cronies sure did!
I didn’t say you did, did I?
Hmmm you are again inventing stuff (i.e. BS) that isn’t there.
Now would you like to answer?
BTW speaking of your creatively at inventing BS, did you man up and apologise to HC for lying (should I say misrepresenting) now… what you said to him years ago?
@rizz I was wrong, I couldn’t find the post. I said so in that very forum.
HC’s link demonstrated your claim about me untrue. That you’ve repeated it since makes you the liar (jasonk repeated the same today).
How am I to answer your question? I never used the term fraudband in 2007, nor since. Direct your question to those that did.
Firstly we all know you were wrong (even though you swore you weren’t – because HC supplied the smoking gun, then you had to finally cede…LOL)…
But what I asked “again” was did you apologise to HC? Why must I repeat everything?
And NEWSFLASH, you were wrong before (and had to admit it) but yet you haven’t learnt and swear you aren’t and never will be wrong again… hmmm. History suggests otherwise.
HC’s link did nothing of the sort. A G A I N… YOU posted your name on an old comment, then you recently “lied” about what you had said in that original post, HC posted the actuals which included the name you placed on it … as for liar, we have already established who is the liar here, who tried to rewrite history and it wasn’t HC, Jason, Renai, Gregory or me was it?
But I see you took my advice and aren’t playing the victim anymore, instead you accuse others of being liars…ROFL.
… Also you used to criticise us for not posting with our full names and you said it gave you credibility by doing so. So why don’t you still post with you full name? Why do you whinge now that your name was copy/pasted? And does that mean (going by your terms) that you ergo have no credibility and are a complete hypocrite by no longer posting your full name?
As to fraudband, well as someone who said he could have been commissioned to write the Coalition’s plan… tell us as the Coaltions would be go to man, how they could suggest FttN is fraudband in 2007 but then embrace it in 2015?
@rizz Your claim re me saying the MTM plan was perfect is not true. Nor did I claim I’d write such a plan. I agreed with the plans reuse of infrastructure, something I’d long argued for if govt was to continue with this folly. The full post was provided by HC.
I’ve never claim I’m ever wrong or never will be? Actually the opposite.
Being the victim isn’t playing it. I’ve accepted you and others aren’t going to change, abuse is instinctive when you’ve little else to back an opinion . At ZDNet I freed myself of such restraint, despite Abel’s ludicrous brisbane line post my response pointing out the fantasy and it being representative of the author’s propensity to believe such rubbish had me banned.
The reason I chose not to use my surname here was explained in the thread. I knew it was only a matter of time until it was posted, if people stalk you in forums posting personal details like email and workplace (you were wrong HC didn’t) it was obvious.
Like “obsolete” I don’t think you understand the english definition of “hypocrisy”.
Rizz / Alex / RS you’ve repeatedly asked me to explain something I didn’t even say. It’s irrational.
So typical of Richard, black is white and white is black…
I recommend you stay away from zebra crossings mate, they could be lethal to someone with your condition!
Both Rizz and myself have been on Delimiter much longer than you Richard. So if anyone could be accused of “stalking” it would be you.
Your relentless SJW class melodramatics aside, it is funny (and sad) how you like to try and revise history though, seems to be a trait that you share with the coalition clowns… I don’t think many are buying what they are saying either :-(
I suspect the real reason you got so bent out of shape when I posted that Zdnet link has more to do with the fact that you got so badly destroyed there and are embarrassed about it (continuing trend on Delimiter it seems).
So Richard you didn’t write “It is almost as if they commissioned me to write it” even though the link say otherwise.
Fact you don’t want to compare apples with apples even when it shows that MTM is a joke.
You instantly jump in the MTM band wagon like claiming Labor FTTP would now cost upto $84 and take to Y26-Y28.
You failed to question when I ask you that it was very odd that the CP15 for MTM and FTTP have the same cost blow but we now know why.
You fail to acknowledge that the figures for rolling out MTM are getting worst. When Turnbull claimed it would cost 1/3 of FTTP but now to so,e figures cost almost the same.
Due to us FTTP fan boys I know FTTB was a good idea as it doesn’t suffer from the same problems with FTTN. Get more people in the short term until they can transition to fibre later.
We are Now stuck with HFC. Due to the new deal I’d it cost more to keep the HFC running since they still don’t know the condition they can’t charge Telstra/Foxtel anymore than what is in the agreement. So it’s going to cost more for everyone else. So since we are stuck with it might as well use it.
You claim about early revenue but than ignores the higher running cost that eats up that revenue. A military station in the U.S. Replaced all there copper and fibre and paid the fibre with the saving of just the power alone.
@jk read the full post, it is as I claim re infrastructure reuse.
You claim costs CPP of alternative are similiar but not in the CP16; FTTN less than halve of FTTP, HFC around a third. You’ve never provided alternate, again you’re welcome too.
Please link to any study that shows electricity costs differential is anymore than several dollars per year per line (7330 node approx 1kw/hr 196 lines).
@HC we agree you’ve posted on this site for longer. Renai please your modify your site to indicate years of posting, perhaps little stars for months of service. Obviously it’s important.
lol, and this is coming from someone who takes any opportunity to remind everyone just how long they were posting on Zdnet for. Apparently THAT is important.
@HC I’m supporting your position. Renai maybe teddy bears for years of service. Perhaps ticks for how many comments threads started / external links to NBN news (double if later used like itnews provided a few days ago) / actual numbers and figures. Crosses for mindless stalking of others’ posts with nothing to add but bile.
oh dear, poor poor Richard :-(
Engage victim mode… or just keep it running continuously for convenience.
Yes Richard you claim a lot of things in that post.
You talk about infrastructure competition where NBN and Turnbull has tried every to stop. You talk about targeting poorly served areas which then NBN doesn’t thanks to Turnbull.
As you have claimed its cheaper like $25B but remember all this mess has a price tag of up to $56B. Yet the total cost are similar and just deflect it off
Even Scenario 4 is cheaper to roll out and finished 1 year sooner.
Considering Morrow him self has said it would cost $200M a year to power the nodes.
But its funny how there all this real world comparisons of roll out and yet to by $27B out in cost from the fully costed plan of $29B and missed target of 7 years. Yet the FTTP was still $20B cheaper than what they believed.
Yet your still to give me an example of any complany delivers a MIN 25Mbps service or even a MIN 50mbps. BT only delivers a 76mbps to 1%. Yet Turnbull thinks he can deliver MIN 50Mbps to 90%.
“It is almost as if they commissioned me to write it” – Richard ZD previously
“Nor did I claim I’d write such a plan” – Richard here yesterday.
These are the contradictions and/or bold faced lies I refer to, not the fact you couldn’t find a doc from years ago. That’s if you wanted to find such a damning doc of course?
Why am I not impartial Richard…?
FYI – in 2005 I fully supported the very FttN you now laud, when Telstra first said they’d roll it out (ahem) and later when the G9 also said they’d do so too (cough).
But Richard, the reality is… it’s no longer 2005 (and I know this may hurt, it’s especially no longer the 1950’s).
@rizz cost figures used for the cba were provided by the NBNCo. Your misunderstanding was addressed here:
https://delimiter.com.au/2015/08/24/we-must-determine-how-the-15bn-nbn-cost-blow-out-occurred/#li-comment-697790
Ah yes, let’s see, political motivated discredited figures … Check.
Next!
Err that’s the point Richard, hellooo…
You claim on the one hand we had to have a CBA and then deride the costs because they don’t say what you want them to. It just depends on the thread which tack you take.
So tell us again, the costs of the ‘COST’ BA you laud, can’t be trusted? Is that right?
Seriously it’s this sort of contradictory stupidity which makes us all guffaw.
You still haven’t answered my question Richard!
https://delimiter.com.au/2015/10/19/labor-should-just-leave-the-nbn-alone-says-m2/#li-comment-703720
“Like ‘obsolete’ I don’t think you understand the english definition of “hypocrisy”.
BTW English has a capital E
I love the term english [sic] definition (I feel a desperate Richard argument based on Americanisms coming up after this…LOL).
Obsolete: – cause (a product or idea) to become obsolete by replacing it with something new.
Hypocrite: – Richard ***** . Sorry Richard just being facetious.
But as a far right conservative and self confessed libertarian, here’s a link to one of the most high profile conservative (former Republican Presidential nominee – iirc) and prominent libertarians and on Fox so it must be right…! Who says… oh look “copper is obsolete.”
Perhaps you need to tell one of your own (but one way up the ladder), Steve Forbes, that he’s wrong?
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/04/11/copper-wire-technology-whose-time-has-passed.html
Here’s my fav paragraphs…
“In the last century, we have seen many technologies come and go. Before the car, came the horse and buggy; before computers, there were typewriters; and before wireless and fiber broadband networks, there was copper wire.
There aren’t many horse and buggies on the road and most of us don’t have typewriters sitting on our desks. So why are copper networks still so widely used although they have been rendered obsolete by next-generation technologies?…
“Traditional copper networks are no longer applicable to the needs and benefits of today’s technologies. It doesn’t make economic or practical sense to continue requiring telecommunications companies to preserve obsolete copper wire technologies when wireless and fiber networks can offer better connections more efficiently.”
Couldn’t have said it better Mr Forbes.
Fancy me a person who is claimed to be a socialist (simply because I support FttP) agreeing with a right wing, billionaire, libertarian eh?
“If everyone you speak with is negative on MTM then I’d suggest you should expand your circle.”
The key to enlightenment is to surround yourself with people who actually know what they’re talking about. Surrounding yourself with MTM advocates would only serve to bolster ones narrow minded idiocy.
+1
Kudos…
The irony of hotcake’s comment is lost on both of you. I’m surround in forum’s like these by MTM advocates?
No it”s lost on you…
Just because you come here (after surrounding yourself with blinded, living in a bubble 1950’s rejects) doesn’t mean you are expanding your circle.
You have an immovable opinion based on ideology and bean counter Reaganomics and come here to argue – period, even in the face of your own facts.
Such as when you ask for info in relation to how FttP speeds can improve the economy over and above FttN, when you yourself have previously delivered that very info.
That isn’t friendly and genuine correspondence, that is some lunatic who is dishonest, disingenuous and on an ideological crusade… I.e.blinkered.
IMO.
“NBN has been pretty good in the last 12 months and they have definitely got better at timeliness and its provisioning has improved so we’ve definitely got more confidence in its capacity to deliver these days than we ever had.”
None of that has anything to do with the MTM and likely very little with any changes made by the new incumbents. All NBN’s progress to date has been based on the FttP and satellite rollouts the prior board set in motion. MTM has been nothing but pure delays and reduced targets until the very recent start of proceedings we’ll see how the next 6 years of contracts turns out.
@SM new management have made substantial changes, including deployment model.
In two terms (6 yrs) Labor connect 260,000 premises. NBNCo and their contracted partners were dysfunctional. In some areas a majority of “premises passed” were service class zero for which they had no answer (Conroy blocked FTTB), they just moved on.
NBNCo has doubled permises passed per year and expect this to continue, possible with MTM however risks remain.
NBN is a terrible policy, today’s NBNCo should rightly be criticised for their continuing mistakes, but to not acknowledge their significant improvements is childish.
that 6 years is a massive generalisation considering they had to plan how it was going to be constructed, spend years in neotiations with Telstra to purchase the pits so they could roll out their fiber and build the whold backend that would make everything work, for which the LNP swooped in and dont have to do/add to their costings.
NBN is a terrible policy? it was actually fantastic for australian tax payers, breaking the cycle of Telstra the incumbent dictating what comms we could get and giving all users access to near universal speeds. Now that LNP are rolling out FTTN to compete with HFC or other FTTN it now leaves a private operator (read telstra) to come in and roll out their own FTTP network and remain the incumbent. so the LNP f&*(ed a really good policy RIGHT UP!!!!
“new management have made substantial changes, including deployment model. ”
Indeed; such as grinding Labors FTTP contracts to a halt and literally not doing anything else deployment related for two years.
They stopped all funding and caused the footprint to shrink by 4%. This has left some of the blackspots that were meant to the covered as the only sections in their rollout area’s not covered by fibre!
Also they suppressed improvements to FttP and cost reductions in the latest trial area (I forget its name atm … big kafuffle over it in senate hearings when the switch over happened) when they ‘lost the results’. That section had costing down and speed up even further than the current progress. Also the original plans always stated the slow start and then increase in rollout was the way it was going to happen.
I’m not arguing about FttB either and I never said Labor was always right (they screwed up enough). Just that the 1 mill premises passed has essentially 0 to do with LNP being in government.
“NBNCo has doubled permises passed per year”
Currently all progress on fibre rollout based off of contracts signed and locked in prior to MTM ever existing or LNP being in government.
@sm to confirm they stopped all funding, but progress is due to preexisting contracts.
What reduction in footprint? LTE expanded to cover previously missing premises.
Slow start expected, but I’m using their own CP figures. The predicted ramp-up failed to materialise, still way off.
You seriously believe that NBNCo is deliberately ignoring FTTH cost savings to inflate the price of deployment?
Quote provided by M2 CEO about timeliness and such improvements are a direct result of the focus of the new management. reflected in improvements in rollout speed and activations. NBNCo performance remains disastrous (annual loss over $2b and climbing, six years in revenue a paltry $160m), but far less than its dysfunctional predecessor.
“What reduction in footprint? LTE expanded to cover previously missing premises. ”
Reality Press releases by LNP and NBN™.
I live in SA and we’ve this troublesome area near modbury exchange. I’ve mates that live in this area with at least 2 in the specific blackspot itself.
~2Mb connection if the weather is ok. This is after T$ spent months and lots of $ in the area ‘fixing things’ after years of lobbying (speed still sucks just its stable … ish) eg pre NBN.
Its been on the map off the map on the map off. Finally on the map and stuff happening (FAN outwards … blackspot at the outer edge last on the list) near the end of Labors 2nd term.
MTM happens and its gone off the map again. It comes back when they allow work to resume. Funds start running out and segment by segment gets dropped (its one of the asbestos troubled areas not widespread but enough it seems). Not just the blackspot but other area’s as well are missing. Some we believe even with partial fibre in the streets.
Since being remove again from the map they have since been declared part of the HFC network rollout now. Blackspot has pretty well 0 HFC at all as far as I am aware (there might be a small %) and other missing FttP area’s aren’t 100% due to lower uptake and buried cabling (its not all aerial).
LTE won’t work as its in the middle of suburbia so good luck getting anyone wanting a 50m tower nearby.
should read:
reality not equal to (seems brackets got absorbed)
@simon presumably you’re talking about rollout plans. They cover only a set number of years. Funds aren’t running out, costs and peak funding is exploding (finance by debt, backed by taxpayers credit rating).
I’m very much aware of internet blackspot, forced to run fibre (non-nbn) to an office in a Melbourne business park.
Again I’d repeat if MTM had been negotiated, with open wholesale VC access with the private sector / govt restricted to subsidies to underserved markets (aka BT model) a universal fixed line highspeed network would be completed today. The NBN created today’s mess, Rudd/Conroy believing that could create from scratch and run a telco. History shows they couldn’t. NBNCo continues this policy folly under new management with a few wins but notable failures (eg overbuilding competitive infrastructure in well served markets, costs exploding). But you can’t go back in time, you play the hand dealt – MTM faster to rollout, cheaper with speeds capturing the majority of benefits. Your friends in SA should be celebrating.
“MTM faster to rollout,”
Is it? by my count its more than 2 years behind with 0 progress currently with no proof it will finish before FttP would. At best MTM is slated for 1 year sooner (if schedules remain perfect).
“cheaper”
They blew their last estimate by $15 billion (leaving a gap of $8 billion if you assume a really bad FttP outlook) and they haven’t even begun to roll anything out.
“with speeds capturing the majority of benefits”
What benefits are being achieved at all? There’s barely a start to any Cu roll out currently. The fact that speed is determined by distance I think is going to seriously affect the take up of higher speed plans (because who’s going to pay for what a service cannot physically provide) and drive that ROI well below its sketchy 2% figure its been reduced to now.
Sure it might double some folks speeds 2x poo is still poo not matter how well its polished.
“presumably you’re talking about rollout plans.”
I probably should have been clearer. I was and am talking about contracts to sub contractors to do FttP work in blackspot area’s (there’s at least 2 in SA and neither have gone particularly well). Sure I’ve not seen the black and white text (I bet short of a RC no-one will ever see the before and afters either).
I am not talking about woulda coulda shoulda party politics (I could care less about such theoretics as hindsight is always 20/20). I am talking about RL on the ground BS that only occurred due to LNP bungling and interference ie following through on the destroy the NBN promise.
My mates are def celebrating … Stable internet went from a certainty in months to a big IF in years.
“NBN is a terrible policy” – Richard yesterday
“It (it being the Coalitions NBN policy) is almost as if they commissioned me to write it” – Richard previously.
*shrugs*
Yeah, and that’s despite the LNP putting the brakes on FTTP – compare actual deployment to where FTTP should have been at this stage. Imagine how positive Mr Horth would have been if the FTTP would have been able to rollout unconstrained…
How does getting something that is slower, slower that is going to cost the same (assuming the folk that lost $15 billion don’t lose anymore) end up being a sound idea? economically/fiscally?
Better, faster and cheaper only works if all three hold true, so far not a single one has been proven to even remotely close to being true.
Faster.
1 node, 744 days.
Sounds like the heading for a really bad internet clip.
MTM will continue. Labor will roll out some FTTP to prove it can be done cheaper.
Good answers in return of this query with form arguments
and telling all concerning that.
Comments are closed.