news Communications Minister Mitch Fifield has described the previous Labor Government’s near-universal Fibre to the Premises approach to the National Broadband Network as a “fantasy model” and “unachievable”, despite the fact that almost all of the progress on the NBN thus far has been based on that model.
Last week the NBN company revealed its rollout schedule for the next three years. The NBN network currently reached about 1.3 million premises, with another 700,000 currently in the construction phases. The new plan contains another 7.5 million premises which will be being deployed over the next three years.
Many have welcomed the release of the plan, however it has attracted criticism from some quarters in Australia’s technology sector due to the fact that much of the progress over the next three years is slated to be made using technologies such as Fibre to the Node and HFC cable, which are technically inferior to Labor’s original Fibre to the Premises model for the NBN.
Shadow Communications Minister Jason Clare last week gave a speech in which he revealed that Labor would significantly up the amount of fibre being deployed by the NBN, if it won power at the next Federal Election, although he stopped short of detailing Labor’s actual plan for the NBN.
In several television interviews last week, Fifield roundly criticised the previous Labor model as well as the plans announced by Clare.
“Well, Jason Clare, the day before yesterday, announced that an elected Labor Government would revert to a full fibre network,” Fifield told Sky News (the transcript is available on the Minister’s website). “Now, what he announced had every single detail you could possibly want other than: when they’re going to do it, how they’re going to do it, and how they’re going to pay for it. So it will be interesting to see if, and when, Labor release that.”
“But look, we know theirs was a fantasy plan, theirs was a fantasy model. It was unachievable. What we have done, and full credit to Malcolm Turnbull as the former Minister, has brought order to bear in what was unbridled chaos.”
“What we see today is a concrete, realistic, achievable plan over the next three years to see a build for 7.5 million premises and we will have 9.5 million premises with the availability of nbn by the end of this process. Because at the moment, we’ve got 1.3 million premises who can access the nbn, another 700,000 under construction, add that to the 7.5 million and you’ve got 9.5 million – that’s a great figure.”
Fifield further told the ABC (transcript available here) that the previous FTTP model would take six to eight years longer to implement, at a cost of $20 to $30 billion more.
“Look, I pose this simple question, would you have more confidence in a program that was auspiced under the leadership of Malcolm Turnbull as Minister, or would you have more confidence in a plan which is really being driven by [Former Communications Minister] Stephen Conroy?” asked Fifield. “Jason Clare, good guy, we all like him, but everyone knows that Stephen Conroy’s really the person driving Labor’s nbn policy.”
“… there are many first world countries, European countries, who are also doing exactly what we’re doing – using that which is there. Using the infrastructure which is available. Using the infrastructure which is fit for purpose, things like HFC. So what we’re doing is not unusual or unique and it will provide the speeds that people need.”
Fact-checking
However, there are several elements of Fifield’s statements which are highly contestable.
Although the Liberal Senator stated that Labor’s FTTP plan was a “fantasy model”, the truth is that almost all of the 1.3 million premises which currently have access to the NBN have access through the Fibre to the Premises technology which Labor instituted as the initial model for the NBN.
In comparison, in two years in power, the Coalition has made relatively little progress with its preferred technologies. The FTTN model is only now starting to be deployed, while the HFC upgrades are still in trial phase.
The NBN company under Labor continually failed to meet its early construction targets, but was also bedevilled by unexpected factors such as the presence of harmful asbestos within Telstra’s pits and pipes infrastructure and difficulties with construction contractors. With those issues largely being handled, the FTTP rollout under the NBN company is accelerating as the NBN company gets better at deploying FTTP infrastructure.
Similarly, it is believed that the Senator’s statement that it would take six to eight years longer to deploy a full FTTP network in Australia, at a cost of $20 billion to $30 billion more, is also contestable. A series of NBN estimates have previously found that an all-FTTP version of the NBN, like the Coalition’s MTM model, would be likely to make a positive return on the Government’s investment in the project and only take several additional years to deploy.
The only document which deviates from these estimates significantly is the most recent NBN corporate plan, released in August 2015. It finds, along the lines which Fifield claimed, that an all-FTTP plan would take six to eight years longer to complete than the Coalition’s MTM vision, as well as costing significantly more.
The NBN company based this conclusion on a high-level analysis which the Government requested it conduct. However, the company and the Government have refused to release this document, defying a Senate order to do so.
In addition, Fifield’s statement that there are “many” first world countries taking the same path as Australia with respect to upgrading their broadband infrastructure is also contestable.
The Minister is correct that a number of other countries are upgrading HFC cable and copper networks, using FTTN and other technologies. However, no other country is pursuing the same commercial model as Australia, where the Government is buying and upgrading legacy networks from commercial telcos. Instead, in almost every other country, the Government is incentivising incumbent telcos to upgrade their infrastructure, through direct subsidy or regulation structuring the industry.
Image credit: Parliamentary Broadcasting
“Unbridled chaos” that has produced all of the progress in your NBN to date, with 20% of premises covered by completion. This hot air denies the very existence of 20% of 10 million. The ignoring of reality has descended to a state that recalls the propaganda nightmare of totalitarian governments of past eras.
Of course he’d say that. When your own plan is shaping up to be an unmitigated disaster. A plan based on lies and misinformation. Blowing out to $56 billion. Based on redundant technology that will require more expense to upgrade to FttP. When everyone, even the non-tech types are figuring out it’s a farce, of course you need to say the one plan that was doing it the right way the first time was a “fantasy”
Mate, you forget that we have a political party in power that likes to think it is in charge of it’s own destiny. And by destiny, I mean facts/truth/reality.
As your version of reality does not match theirs, expect to have your citizenship revoked any day now…
“I am the Coalition. I reject your reality and substitute my own.”
Adam Savage and Tom Baker [the quote is a near paraphrase from the Dr Who series ‘The Deadly Assassin’] would be bemused.
Formed in 2009 NBNCo has just recently passed 1.3m of its 11b premises. 1m of thise connected in the coalitions term.
Under Conroy/Quigley NBNCo didn’t just miss early targets. They missed every target in every CP, and by massive margins.
FTTH is accepted as much more expensive and slower to rollout by all but the fanboys. Stating the obvious:
Independent telecommunications analyst Ian Martin says:
“Fibre to the premise will clearly be a lot more expensive,” he said.
http://m.smh.com.au/business/nbn-would-go-back-to-fibre-optic-under-australian-labor-party-says-jason-clare-20151013-gk8fih.html
But the FTTH cheerleader refuse to put a CPP figure out, prefering their delusion.
He’s an economist, not “telecommunications analyst”, you need to learn the difference!
@dj from the article. Attack them. You need to learn the difference.
You could try verifying that what you post is accurate … especially when it comes to politically motivated documents written by cronies and ppl with no engineering background passing themselves off as “Telco Analysts”!!!
“1m of thise connected in the coalitions term.”
Under contracts signed in Labor’s term. Further momentum was stifled because of the uncertainty.
“by massive margins”
Yet we had Alan Kohler saying at the time that it was basically on track. You are out of touch with reality.
“Independent telecommunications analyst Ian Martin says:
“Fibre to the premise will clearly be a lot more expensive,” he said.”
He is one voice saying not much at all. His language in that entire article is unacceptably vague and negative for a so-called analyst. He also completely ignores any benefit that would be achieved. Contrast this with Paul Budde, who immediately goes to specifics and applications, in many, many markets around the world.
“FTTH is accepted as much more expensive and slower to rollout”
I agree! But it is highly justified. It is cheap for what the economy would gain in return. You do not need to quote figures. Just look around the world at the transformation taking place, which is unstoppable. There is an abundance of evidence. The only delusion is from those like you who ignore worldwide reality.
@M Quigleys CP’s and actual performance are now know and on the company’s website. Even with his Orwellian redifinition of premised passed to include service class zero, ie not ready for service, show me one figure that is even close. By their own standard they failed massively to meet rollout target set by themselves (point out at the time), yet strangely senior managers kept awarding themselve performance bonuses.
It is not cheap when compared to return. What transformation is taking place is say Brunswick VIC one of the early FTTH locations. They remain massive recipients of taxpayer spending. The economic benefits has been much discussed in these forum by myself and others, almost all cam be captured by universal access to relatively low speeds. Perhaps you’d like to link to specific research suggesting otherwise (please read past posts first so we don’t have to cover the same territory).
It’s no secret that Quigley’s team where still fine tuning process’s and methodologies – the fact is FTTP deployment rates where ramping up until the Libs flat-lined the roll-out!
They had major initiatives in play to speed up the roll-out and reduce costs – see Project Fox and architecture 2.0 as merely one example that unsurprisingly the Libs tried to cover up and then ignored in all their propaganda based “reviews”!!!
According to you 12/1mbps is high speed.
So what according to you is “low speeds”?
“almost all cam [sic] be captured by universal access to relatively low speeds.”
This is only because of the prohibitively high pricing compared to more established FTTH markets like Sweden (example just outside Stockholm: 1Gbps symmetric, unlimited traffic, $60/month), therefore Australia cannot be used as an example.
As for research, no one is as blind as those who will not see.
“The economic benefits has been much discussed in these forum by myself and others, almost all cam be captured by universal access to relatively low speeds…”
ONCE AGAIN (yes shouting) I refer you to YOUR link to a doc which said and I quote…
“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 and stop saying such things when you yourself supplied the very link to, err prove your self wrong… nice work.
A downward revision of 600,000 premises represents a delay of just over 3 months assuming they reach the peak, promised in 2013, of 6000 premises passed per day.
Just over 3 months in a 10-year project. What part of that is “massive”? I will give you the answer right now: no part of it.
Richard,
Brunswick was a trial site.
Surely you know what that means, especially since NBN couldn’t get power to their Mtm trial site in Epping, VIC.
“I agree!”
With the recent MTM blowout cost would have been roughly equivalent with only two years difference in rollout speed.
NBN had to revise there targets twice last year to hit there target.
Well Richard could you explain why if they had continued rolling out FTTP it would only cost $8b more and finished 1 year later.
Can you also explain since you could have wrote it your self why a fully costed plan on proven tech rolling out every where that there cost and rollout was so wrong consider missing a target by 7 years is pretty huge (2016 now 2022).
That they would go from a $29B to $56B in just 2 years with out building anything. That they price tag almost doubled.
“1m of thise connected in the coalitions term. ”
Those are fibre connections correct? Fibre is only part of MTM because Labor paid for it and Quigley set it in motion. MTM hasn’t increase the fibre layout (they reduced it). Hence what does it matter the which government is in power. What matters is which one set up the company and signed the contracts to get that done. Follow your mantra Richard stick to the facts not the press releases please.
Otherwise its no different than when the liberals taking credit for launching the satellite!
“FTTH is accepted as much more expensive and slower to rollout by all but the fanboys”
I think you’ll find a large portion of us freely admit the costs will be higher and the timeline would have been longer (that said now its just as likely MTM to take as long if not longer). Just not to quite the inflated levels you seem to fixated on.
I mean if we were saving 50% of the cost sure but we’re not … not even close. Best guess is ~$8 billion if you believe the figures from people that lost over $15 billion in under a year.
Hell even a $100 Billion the libs worst scare-mongering figure doesn’t look that bad over that period if compared as a % of our GDP over 20 years. (benefits of being a GBE … no nasty need for quarterly returns or a yearly dividend … its all long term or should be).
Next you have the issue of a severe lack of saleable asset at the end of all this purely due to MTM.
~70% of the network is obsolete (by NBN own admission) the minute its finished. Next you have the issue that the locked in maintenance contracts stand to lose the company a lot of money (those weren’t a factor in the reduced ROI either). Then there’s the severe reduction in ROI all of a sudden. 6-8% isn’t great considering the outlay but its about par for said industry at the wholesale level (the unprofitable end). Now its ‘maybe’ 2%.
Who the heck is going to buy that for $56 Billion let alone a figure that would make the Aussie taxpayer an small return?
“1m of thise connected in the coalitions term. ”
Yes of course, those Labor-signed FTTP contracts that were scheduled to be rolled out up to 2 years post-election were all the Liberals’ doing. You swine.
“FTTH is accepted as much more expensive and slower to rollout by all but the fanboys.”
I’m assuming your definition of fanboy is ‘educated’ and all is ‘the multi-million dollar smear ‘reviews’ (of history and reality) conducted by the government led by a PM whose only policy while in opposition was ‘to oppose”?
“But the FTTH cheerleader refuse to put a CPP figure out”
Plenty of people have reminded you the latest figure (assuming Project Fox weren’t abandoned) was around the $2500 mark.
You ignore changes to rollout model (at the expense of redundancy) that weren’t negotiated by previous management. See M2 CEO’s comments.
Please the link to “Project Fox”. No published figure from NBNCo I seen showed actual CPP of $2500 with broad application (a figure below greenfields). NBNCo has over 1m FTTH, I’d expect their CPP estimates to be very accurate with this level of experience.
You conveniently ignore changes to rollout model (at the expense of taxpayer) that were negotiated by current management. See FTTN overbuild shambles.
You conveniently ignore what Labor achieved and give credit to the opposition. See FTTP rollout figures.
You conveniently ignore seemingly every thread you’ve participated in in the last 3 years with numerous people consistently spoon feeding you information that you quickly forget (in usually less than 5 minutes).
You conveniently ignore costs and figures presented by one review when they are contradicted by another review, cherry picking only all the information to suit your warped argument.
“Please the link to “Project Fox”. ”
As I am short on time, I compromise.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/connecting-one-premise-to-national-broadband-network-will-cost-4316-20150224-13n6sm.html
$3384 (before the inefficiency of the Liberals’ input raised the CPP by $200 over the course of a year)
http://www.zdnet.com/article/quigleys-project-fox-still-saving-nbn-co-money-on-fibre-morrow/
Minus $315 thanks to Project Fox, so around ~$3000 CPP.
As you are fully aware, that is a conservative figure with a more robust costing being released since, though you’ll conveniently feign ignorance, won’t you?
Of course these are links to leftist publications an/or fibre fanboys so they won’t even receive 5 seconds let alone the normal 5 minutes :(
But wow I’m surprised someone who bags FttP 24/7, claims to have all the answers to every (even unasked) question and was by his own admission a CIO, doesn’t even know about PF.
Not that these extra facts will be taken into account, “either”!
Yes, notice how he stops responding.
NBN Co lost the documentation (and ignored senate committee to produce) for the most current FttP trial when the new board took over.
If you believe the leaks those figures were ~$2400 in question with projections to reduce well below $2k mark (in NZ their latest figures are down to $1300-1400 and they are expecting it to hit $1k pp by the time its completed). The values are out there just a certain government and its new board are hiding things. $3700 is what it costs under the libs using prior work and models (as stated prior an increase on Labor figures)
The two links support my position and repudiate yours. The cost were not as you claimed, new management are activing using and researching new FTTH deployment methods to make that option as cheap as possible. FTTH CPP does not come close to FTTN nor HFC.
All entirey reasonable positions, always preferable to unsupported conspiracy theories and unsource quotes.
You make ‘more expensive’ out to be a bad thing.
I can by a hyundai or ford for $15k. Or I can buy a BMW or Subaru for $50k. Which is likely to be better quality and which would you prefer to own? Which has a better resale value?
Why do many more people by the lower priced models?
I not in cars however I suspect the loss on the resale of a Hyundais is much less than a BMW (by magnitude and proportion).
Quality is important; but not the only consideration. Price is equally important. Digital technologies is even less differentiated by “quality”; ADSL, FTTN, FTTH end user experience is the same layer 1/2 at a given speed.
“Digital technologies is even less differentiated by “quality”; ADSL, FTTN, FTTH end user experience is the same layer 1/2 at a given speed.”
Visit a blackspot area. Wait until it rains (one of a host of potential environmental issues).
Tell me then how well fibre (unaffected by water ingress) is anywhere near the same as the ADSL or its Cu counterparts!
Fibre’s speed and stability isn’t affected by any of the myriad of ways that the signals can be affected if sent via Cu.
Fibre’s distance is now possible out to 40km for the end node vs less than 1km (under the most recent certified standard here).
Fibre issues resolve around the quality of the network build and its capability to provide the services advertised (and the RSP to not congest its networks). ie corporate integrity (something people can vote with with their $ and change)! no-ones come up with a way to control the weather yet!
You seem to forget that MT stated 3 years that every house in Australia would be connected to their version of the NBN.
It’s 2 years later… where is it? Oh yeah. Labor’s fault.
Also ignoring the fact it went from being cheaper to being significantly more expensive… Let’s just blame Labor for everything, shall we?
Labor blamed the falling mining industry why they couldn’t get the budget in surplus, so we’ll just blame them!
@ryan before the election I posted the coalition targets were ambitious. I’ve not blamed Labor for their policy failings, actually called them out in them. These are their failures.
Quigley’s mantra of on time and on budget was preposterous; I was the child pointing to the lack of clothes on the emperor (shouted down by the crowd of believers). His costs figures discredited on revenue, rollout underperformance a matter historical fact. This I blame Labor, as well as the original NBN policy.
Contrary to the claim the mining industry was failing during Labor’s time, our terms of trade during the rudd/gillard/rudd years was the best ever. Their budget deficits (despite claiming surpluses coming, some Members actually claiming delivered) were a direct consequence of their spending. GFC revenue decline was little and brief, their response to the imagined crisis disproportionate. We today live with the hundreds of billions of debt, a coalition govt doing much less to address this burden on future generations than I’d like.
Those 6 years of govt were more dysfunctional than whitlam’s period in office. A record that took some beating.
So what about the deficit that has ballooned since the Liberals have taken power? Oh right, Labors fault… Sorry, I forgot. Everything the Liberals do wrong is just because Labor did it “wronger” first.
“@ryan before the election I posted the coalition targets were ambitious.”
Link please Richard? Having seen your incessant (proven) porkies, nothing you say is believed and needs clarification.
——
“I’ve not blamed Labor for their policy failings” vs “Those 6 years of govt were more dysfunctional than whitlam’s period in office. A record that took some beating.”
Showing you true colours now Richard and for about the third time today already and it’s not even lunch, more complete contradictions. Anyway…
Maybe you’re right, perhaps they were dysfunctional…but had your eyes (sorry eye) closed for a couple of years have you?
Newsflash: – whilst your eye was shut, along came Tony… to show us/ them all, the true meaning of not only dysfunctional but complete incompetence.
Still awaiting that link Richie… dat a boy :)
“Independent” means different things to different people. But to call a person independent who puts consultant for nbn™ Australia on his LinkedIn profile. Just priceless. Ian Martin, independent contractor for #fraudband, has some propaganda for you. Could it be that he wants more dollars for future consulting? https://au.linkedin.com/pub/ian-martin/68/aa5/a3
Dude, you found LinkedIn profile on the Internet. That’s stalking.
And he probably wasn’t dared to “find it yourself” either?
It’s like the work of the devil….
Considering during the HFC wars both Telstra and Optus combined had a peak premises passed build rate of 12,000 per day, NBN Co could easily have hit its 8,000 premises per day peak for FTTP.
Once again the Libs are lying to the electorate!
Not lying.
Creating a different reality…
This is the party of Dr No, where saying the same thing over and over again, with the support of News Ltd, means it becomes the new reality.
“Could have”, NBNCos mantra, but didn’t. Never came close.
Kinda hard to do your job effectively when new management comes in and ties you to train tracks.
Better, faster, cheaper.
Which one of those has been met instead?
Well the old cliche is that you can only have 2 of better, cheaper, faster but not all 3. In this case it is zero out of 3.
They came waaay closer then FttN has…
Richard and Mitch Fifield, may I suggest a form of recreation for you both. Since you both enjoy Fighting with Fantasy you should find a book series called “Fighting Fantasy” by Steve Jackson and Ian Livingstone. It’s even on Kindle. The final boss fight should be against:
Rupert Murdoch: skill 12 stamina 24.
However if you have found the anti-propaganda kris knife then Rupert Murdoch becomes:
Rupert Murdoch: skill 7 stamina 5.
If you win go to 400.
And more :
Describing Labor’s “all fibre vision” as intrusive and costly “mirage”, Mr Switkowski said the NBN was in a “difficult position” when he took over as executive chairman after the 2013 election.
“It was a company that was demoralised not because they weren’t doing great things or good people but because the expectations were very high and the pressure to deliver on a simple set of metrics like houses past was so intense that they were I think dysfunctional in the way they were approaching it,” he said.
http://www.afr.com/business/telecommunications/ziggy-switkowski-says-nbn-faces-challenge-meeting-2020-completion-target-20151016-gkbaji
Turnbull goes on to talk about risk. All obvious points.
A/ I know people who work for NBN and have done for around 5 years and the morale only hit the floor when the libs Won the election and Turnbull forced out the board.
And B/ ziggy aka Mr Kodak had proven himself a complete hypocrite and yes man – he was actively striking the benefits of FTTP years after he left Telstra and years before Turnbull hired him to run NBN Co!
Bloody auto spell, “actively spruking”.
@djos
A/ massive change expected, always a difficult time. Staff morale has since has been quantified and reported on in the latest AR.
B/ where’s the evidence to support your claim. Reasonable senior managers also acknowledge the benefits of FTTN/B and HFC; undeniable evidence available.
I have similar issues with big fingers & small screen. We get the drift anyway, regardless of minor typos. Has delimiter removed the edit after post function? Often difficult to read in tiny edit box, errors obvious after posting.
Here you go:
https://delimiter.com.au/2014/03/17/switkowski-2009-fibre-make-copper-obsolete/
Switkowski in 2009: Fibre to make copper “obsolescent”
@djos why do you believe your link contradicts mine?
The articles quotes Quigley’s support for fibre and its undeniable advantages. He’s quoted that if such a network was built it would make obsolete (“obsolesence”) the CAN.
Who would disagree with these sound positions?
However as noted in Renai’s article there’s other factors; NBNCo is directed by their statement of expectations which mandates cost and time considerations. It is not hypocritical to acknowlegde the superiority of FTTH whilst also the cost and speed of delivery advantages of FTTN/B & HFC.
The CAN generates billions in revenue, upgrading with advances in technology represents good value to deliver speeds demanded by consumers (with many options to upgrade if required).
Now’s an opportune time to re-post this…
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.” Not would be if… IS…
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?
Yes in Ziggy we trust…
Oh but not when his people said the copper was 5 minutes to midnight (and needed replacement) or when he said fibre makes copper obsolete…
LOL
Richard,
Asking for peoples “feels” after a company is effectively acquired (given NBNco is driven by government control, a change in government is very definitely analogous to an aggressive takeover) isn’t going to lead to the same answers as before an such takeover.
Also Ziggy stating that an SOE was in a “difficult position” is like stating “nuclear explosions are a bit violent”. Finally, Mr Switkowski was quite keen to resist technological improvement whilst at the helm of Telstra; so he’s not exactly going to be joining any choir immortal to sing the praises of Fibre.
Finally, if Ziggy was suggesting 2020 was a difficult target; what was Turnbull’s original 2016 target? Insanity?
FTTH wasn’t ever going to be cheaper. Arguably not faster. That’s not the point. It’s never been the point. But the funny thing is; the overland telegraph went in, regardless of posturing over it’s cost and merit.
Same with Snowy River. Same with the Sydney Harbour bridge. There is always someone so buried in the minutia of detail; that they can’t see the bigger picture.
Ever looked up, Richard?
It wasn’t a fantasy before you liberal mobs took over the Government.
It would not be a fantasy if you let original NBNco team did their work.
It would have been a reality, achievable, efficient and effective project if Turdball and Abbort kept their hands off this awesome wonderful telecommunication infrastructure project.
So go hide in a hole and keep your own fantasies to yourself!
The fantasy model is the one they sold: 25 down by 2016 for 90% of households. That is the pure fantasy. Turnbull lied to Australia, and knowing their weakness, they deflect the incoming attacks.
The fantasy is the #fraudband claim, and the sad reality is by the current velocity, 90% of Australians will not have 25 Mbps by 2020.
A little reminder of what happened under Labor.
https://delimiter.com.au/2013/09/25/credibility-blown-nbn-co-wildly-revises-targets/
So we vote Labor back in in 2016, and all of a sudden it’s all going to be ok, the resurrected FTTP rollout won’t have any of the constant revised target problems it encountered previously (why?) and it helps to totally ignore the massive three year interim scale back of the FTTP rollout under the Coalition which has to be made up for.
So what revised year does Labor anticipate completion of their FTTP rollout restarted from late 2016 and in reality it won’t be until 2017 and at what revised cost?
A downward revision of 600,000 premises represents a delay of just over 3 months assuming they reach the peak, promised in 2013, of 6000 premises passed per day.
Just over 3 months in a 10-year project. Big deal. That’s “Reality.” BTW Renai’s headline for that article was so misleading as to be ridiculous.
And how many FttN customers have signed up in the last two years… yet one whines about 3 months…LOL
And let’s not forget the $15B blow out.
Ah fraudband, ain’t it great.
I can answer that. Apparently according to the Senate Estimates 53. A grand total of 53… Good job GimpCo.
Thank you HC that’s very informative.
53 you say? So about one customer every two weeks over two years. Wow.
So that means we should have FttN done by next millennium ;) Well that’s the sort of rationale the naysayers used even for a start up. Remember when NBNCo first year reported a loss and they said see, white elephant…ROFL.
It does show, as we said all along, MTM/FtN/HFC or whatever the fuck you want to call this shambles… is indeed a shambles…
Plus, as a side issue, gotta love the naysayers of this world and their he-man monikers… Reality, Lord Watchdog, Advocate… *sigh*
Regardless.. why do people like this and I’m not meaning to be personal here… bag a 3 month (thanks for the figure Martin H) FttP roll out hold up from a start up company, but point blank refuse to hold a 2 year FttN hold up (ooh apart from 53 clients…) from a now established company (established thanks to Quigley & Co) to the same account?
Fantasy network said the clown in a hi-vis vest with his hands wrapped around fibre, for the fucking press…
But regardless, fantasy network vs nightmare network…
Gee what a choice…
+1 Good point Rizz
Still doesn’t answer the crucial question when will a Labor NBN FTTP build restart in 2018 be finished by and at what cost?
Will already built NBN owned HFC and FTTN areas in 2016 be retrofitted with FTTP?
So…
Having blamed them/FttP for the past and present, the new angle is… drum roll…
Also start blaming them for the future…
What a surprise.
FFS if anyone is to blame for the future it’s those rolling out an obsolete network that they themselves described as “fraudband” some 8 years ago when it was still somewhat current.
Seriously ask your same question of Mal and why he wasted two years turning back the clock to retrograde FttN, when even FttP’s harshest critic Richard said the FttH roll out has increased rapidly whilst FttN/HFV has stagnated (or words like that).
This is a very pertinent question to ask now as FttN is happening now (albeit slower than snail pace). As opposed to your very speculative question in relation to events which may or may not happen in 2018.
The questions and more importantly the answers are crucial to Labors chances (in the voters eyes) to them having a NBN policy that will enhance their prospect of being elected into Government.
If you restart a FTTP rollout in 2017-18 it will obviously change their original dream of 93% of residences connected to it by 2021.
At the moment all we are getting is the simplistic slogan that Labor is the party of fibre and the Liberals are the party of copper, yeah ok that was the repetitive line you used before the last election, hello it didn’t work, we need more than that.
Comments are closed.