It’s just a “draft” document, NBN says on $641m FTTN blowout


news The NBN company has attempted to cast doubt on the veracity of leaked internal documents showing that the cost of remediating Telstra’s copper network has blown out by a factor of ten times to $641 million, pointing out that the document in question was a “draft” and “not endorsed” by its executive team.

Under Labor’s previous near-universal Fibre to the Premises model for the NBN, the HFC cable and copper networks owned by Telstra and Optus would have been shut down. However, the Coalition’s Multi-Technology Mix plan instituted by Malcolm Turnbull as Communications Minister in the Abbott administration is seeing them acquired and upgraded by the NBN company.

The NBN company and the Government have consistently attempted to block the release of information detailing how much it will cost the NBN company on a per node basis to deploy the Coalition’s preferred Fibre to the Node technology on Telstra’s copper network, as well as information pertaining to how much the remediation of Telstra’s copper network will cost.

However, internal documents released by the Opposition today showed that, by the NBN company’s own estimates, the cost of remediating Telstra’s network had blown out by a factor of ten, to about $641 million, with the cost of rolling out infrastructure to each premise via Fibre to the Node had blown out from $600 to about $1600 per premise.

In a statement issued in the wake of the document’s released by the Opposition, the NBN company attempted to pour cold water on the veracity of the document.

“The document is a draft document from March has not been endorsed by the executive,” the company said.

The approach somewhat mimics a similar NBN company reaction to previous revelations involving internal NBN documents regarding the HFC cable network owned by Optus. At the time, the NBN company claimed the documents were only a “hypothetical exercise”.

The NBN company also made a number of other statements regarding the FTTN revelations today.

“Based on our experience in the field, which for FTTN now extends to more than 550,000 homes in construction and more than 40,000 homes ready for service, our cost per premises for FTTN as outlined in the Corporate Plan in August is proving accurate,” the company said.

“Any costs related to the FTTN network are accounted for in the corporate plan released in August, which included the increase in peak funding.”

The company noted that it had launched its commercial FTTN product on 21 September this year.

“As released in August this year and discussed at length, NBN now has the most comprehensive plan built from a true history of actuals and experience in building the network at scale,” the company said.

” Risks and mitigation plans for the network are outlined in the Corporate Plan, and the revised peak funding figure takes these scenarios into account.  We have produced a peak funding range and provided a contingency, as prudent measures to manage a project of this size and complexity.”

Image credit: NBN company


  1. It’s just a “draft” document seems to be nbn’s very own version of “the dog ate my homework”!

    Really Pathetic!!!

    • Actually it reeks more of the “on water operational matter”, nbn have just coined a term to cover the same embarrassments. The plebes really don’t need to know what we are doing in their name…

  2. I note that the disclaimers from nbnco never actually go as far as to say that the documents are wrong, just that they are hypothetical exercises or have not been endorsed.

    • That is exactly it….

      ““The document is a draft document from March has not been endorsed by the executive,” the company said.”

      That doesn’t say the document is wrong… just that Morrow hasn’t officially released it. Isn’t that the point of a leaked document? That it generally is something they don’t want to see the light of day?

      • Exactly what I was going to say – if NBN Co had ‘endorsed’ it, it wouldn’t have needed to be leaked, would it? That’s pretty much the definition of a leak – when official channels won’t allow information to get out it leaks…

  3. ” the cost of rolling out infrastructure to each premise via Fibre to the Node had blown out from $600 to about $1600 per premise.”

    Hell bells – what sort cost blowout does that indicate?

    • They actually haven’t refuted them at all, all they’ve said is the leaked document is a draft which isnt actually refuting anything!

      If they were actually refuting the claims, they’d release a different set of numbers.

      • I think they claim it isn’t a blowout because it was “accounted for” in the corporate plan in August.

        Apparently, being part of the possible up to $56bn peak funding blowout, doesn’t constitute being a blowout.

        • Now we are starting to see why they can’t nail their figures down to the nearest $1 billion.

          Seems the real engineers and the like haven’t been able to report on costings until now so all the bad guesswork and fudging is coming to the fore!

          • The real engineers still aren’t allowed to report costings. Remember this was leaked…and I can imagine the witch hunt happening right now…I wonder if Senate estimates can question the reports authors? THAT would throw a cat amongst the pigeons. The nbn lawyers would be hovering with their “CiC” on every question trying to muzzle the discussion.

          • I meant report internally (ie author this document) to MTM management. Not report to the senates or the public.

      • It’s real funny no leaked documents under labor oh they released everything nothing redacted

          • @Alain here’s some more up to date reading for you:


            The NBN company’s latest set of financial results released yesterday confirm a truth which has become almost taboo to mention in public: Labor’s original strategy for the National Broadband Network is working very well — in fact, it still represents almost all the NBN company has done in its existence so far.

          • Rizz,

            So the Coalition honoured outstanding brownfield FTTP contracts (like they said they would before the 2013 election) kept the greenfields FTTP rollout going along with fixed wireless and satellite all large rollouts because HELLO they are all significant infrastructure models of MtM policy, and significant on going rollouts in terms of residence activation, why? – because they were never stopped.

            Jeez all of that is a surprise, who would have ever thought, but it’s drawing a long bow to say it’s all thanks to Labor because the Labor NBN stewardship was floundering and I wasn’t aware Conroy was still Communications Minister and the NBN management and board are exactly as Labor had it before losing Government.

          • BS Alain, you know full well they cancelled a bunch in SA (with SAPN) and switched the Tassie contracts to FTTN!!! There are others too but you are just trolling you BS as usual!!!

          • Derek we are apparently Jason too now…

            Seriously, I find it hard to believe I live on the same planet, let alone in the same country, as someone who not only thinks, but actually writes such daily fucking nonsense for all to see, like alain does.

            Such childish stupidity and BS, matched to complete subservience to the blind conservative ideology, is unsurpassed, IMO.

          • Oh so the Coalition NBN Co have not been for the last two years rolling out greenfields FTTP, some brownfields FTTP, FTTB, fixed wireless and satellite, and it’s all BS.

            I must tell a relative who connected to Coalition NBN Co fixed wireless one month ago and is very happy with the speed it is all BS.

            Conroy is not in charge anymore and Quigley is not the NBN Co CEO, you really need to move on and start inputting advice to Labor on their NBN 2016 campaign, knock up some fraudband banners and dance around some FTTN cabinets, that should convince the swinging NBN voter.


          • @Rizz he’s nothing more than an F’N oxygen thief, he is also very representative of the half-wits the Conservatives have conned into following their lies and propaganda to their own detriment!

            It should be a crime to be that stupid!

          • @ Reality..

            Classic comment (as per c/p below) even from you child…

            * “Oh so the Coalition NBN Co have not been for the last two years rolling out greenfields FTTP, some brownfields FTTP, FTTB, fixed wireless and satellite, and it’s all BS.

            ** I must tell a relative who connected to Coalition NBN Co fixed wireless one month ago and is very happy with the speed it is all BS.

            *** Conroy is not in charge anymore and Quigley is not the NBN Co CEO, you really need to move on and start inputting advice to Labor on their NBN 2016 campaign, knock up some fraudband banners and dance around some FTTN cabinets, that should convince the swinging NBN voter.”


            * Yes the Coalition have been rolling out FttP, haven’t they. And yet you are blind to the irony, nay hypocrisy, of you of all people beating your chest about FttP roll outs? GOLD.

            But how’s the FttN (FRAUDBAND)/MTM part which differs from the previous rollout/plan going? Oh slowly if at all, with cost and time frame blowouts and daily fuckups.

            Seems you just admitted and I agree, “FttP did work and is still working (and working much better than FttN/MTM – FRAUDBAND), regardless of whether the Labor Party or the Coalition are rolling it out.”

            ** “You’re relatives” are enjoying the “Coalition’s” NBN. What a surprise.

            *** Yes we know Conroy/Quigley aren’t in charge anymore. Thanks for finally realising this too. So not only do you finally acknowledge in just three paragraphs, that FttP worked and still is working, but also you finally acknowledge that Conroy/Quigley are no longer in charge and ergo cannot in any way be blamed for the “current FttN/MTM – FRAUDBAND complete and utter mess”.

            Wow how about that alain…

            You’re welcome.

  4. If this is just a draft then I don’t wanna see the final document. They should just go with FTTP right now.

  5. Come on guys benefit of the doubt eh?

    After all they have been so correct, transparent and professional in relation to MTM so far…

    Oh wait

  6. Y’know the thing about draft documents?

    The data is usually as close to current as possible.

    You can’t wheedle your way out of this one Morrow. Just because it didn’t get your endorsement doesn’t mean the figures are made up.

    • The other funny thing is not endorsed by the executive. So do they have some magic executive power that they can wish the amount of remediation required away?

  7. “It’s just a “draft” document, NBN says on $641m FTTN blowout”

    Meaning the actual costs will be much higher.

  8. I imagine there is a very furious witch hunt occurring in the depths of NBN Co at this very moment. How dare these pesky kids keep leaking information which is damaging to NBN Co’s image.

  9. The leak has Tony Abbott all over it.. The only thing that can distroy the PM’s ratings is the NBN Abbotts plan all along.

  10. I recall the LNP lambasting Labor for its proposal to spend $43 billion claiming they could build the NBN cheaper. It is laughable that they have had such a hugh over run. There should be a Royal Commission into their ineptitude.

  11. What exactly are they drafting this sort of document for in the first place? Are there people at NBN being paid to draft up documents for hypothetical outcomes?

    • They are only hypothetical and draft when the public get wind of them. Otherwise I imagine they were legitimate briefing papers for executive/board.

    • Technically speaking Marc yes there will be folk paid to consider hypotheticals (or should I say risk) as part of their remit. In a 20+ year GBE multi multi Billion $ project ‘risk’ is something that you have to manage, there is going to be things you just don’t know until you start digging. The various Fibre trials under NBN Co were probably akin to this in trying to find different/better/cheaper methods of doing FttH. At some point in something that takes that long you are making predictions about the future that may never occur. The issue isn’t that the document exists or was author is how far of the mark predictions have been that is truly scary.

      Take the Collins class sub for example. The Computers that were predicted 25 years prior didn’t eventuate so the combat system needed a re-do. That came at a set cost and budget blowout (even there though they knew how damn much to a very tight margin). Even then the total blowout was under 15% which over 25 years is a massive success!

  12. The revised FTTN CPP figure is in the CP 2016 released in August for all to see, another figure for all to see but hardly mentioned is brownfields CPP at $3,700, assuming the noise about the ‘copper blowout’ is all about justifying a FTTP build, it’s quite simple, it doesn’t.

    • B.s. Alain, FTTN is stage one, it still needs to be upgraded to FTTP in less than 10 years at even greater expense!

      At least of if was FTTdp we’d have a sensible affordable upgrade path, but FTTN to FTTP upgrades are expensive because most of FTTN gets binned! It’s money wasted!

      • In the absence of trying to trying to turn the FTTP figure into a FTTN figure even factoring in the ‘gasp-shock-horror gleeful dance around the MTM maypole’ blowout which is about the same figure to just overbuild the Optus HFC with FTTP, the argument switch is back to the old fall back line FTTN will have to be replaced in 10 years or less with FTTP.

        As that statement is based on conjecture, the opposite statement also based on conjecture that it won’t need to be replaced in that time frame can be made.

        It’s a pity the majority of current NBN FTTP customers are on the lower speed plans, perhaps you meant in 10 years or less they might take the highest speed.

        • And yet senario 4 is cheaper than the MTM with no FTTN lol full FTTP senario 2 is only $8B more lol with no HFC or FTTN.

          Turnbull could have avoided the embarrassing $26B blow and 5 year blow out of going with the mess of the MTM

          • I know Rizz it’s like there pre election of using the HFC that he claimed lol. Any if at all credibility he had left went with that statement.

          • Jason K,

            “And yet senario 4 is cheaper than the MTM with no FTTN lol full FTTP senario 2 is only $8B more lol with no HFC or FTTN.”

            Incorrect, but you know that, but despite it being incorrect it’s all you have.

            oh I forgot apparently this gives it emphasis.


          • Reality can you please point out where I am incorrect. Or are you now like when you claim Turnbull was lying about his pre election policy and morrow lying about the restart counter factual. Are you now claiming the SR are wrong.

          • LOL… he’s now had time now to familiarise himself with the scenarios he knew absolutely nothing about until yesterday (which caught him embarrassed and with his panties down) but typically now, he’s found a word or two to be a complete diick about and argue over… classic alain

          • Jason K,

            The SR figures and targets have been amended in CP 2016, just in the same way the Labor FTTP rollout was amended in each progressive CP for six years of their rollout.

            You prefer to ignore that CP16 was published and updated SR estimates, mainly because the CP 16 FTTP figures don’t look good relative to the MtM alternatives, so like all good FTTP fans desperately trying to push a obsolete and failed ‘back to 2013’ NBN agenda, apply a hefty dose of denial.

          • Reality
            You are in denial
            As I have stated those FTTP figures in the cp16 are to stop doing MTM and go back to FTTP not if Turnbull had continued the rollout as you would like to claim. A point you complete ignore just to claim FTTP dearer. So again labor is not going back to a full FTTP rollout due to mess we have now so those figures are irrelevant. But your beloved cp16 also stated that there are not better estimate than what’s in the SR.

            So since there are no better estimates than what’s in the SR according to the CP16. So if we compare the current rollout to say if they had decided to do senario 4 instead senario 4 is cheaper.
            Or if we compare senario 2 if they had decided it instead of the current rollout, a full FTTP is only $8B more.

            But please keep trying to cherry pick figures to make your statement like when you tried to claim the pre election policy was going to use HFC lol

        • @alain you are Ignoring the point as usual!

          Stop being a liberal shill for once in your life!

          • The point has been well and truly made, the repetitive indicator of that is that it’s time for a drop into the old standby when it all get’s too hard, a personal attack.

        • “It’s a pity the majority of current NBN FTTP customers are on the lower speed plans, perhaps you meant in 10 years or less they might take the highest speed.”

          Given that 65% of NBN customers are currently on plans that are higher than the theoretical maximum afforded to the majority of Australians pre-NBN (ie ADSL2+) I’d say they’re flocking to the higher speeds just fine (substantiated by documents indicating the higher speed takeup is higher than forecasted).

          And these speed plans are higher than the 15Mbps Turnbull et al tried to tell everyone will be needed in 10 years… I know whose figures NOT to trust…

    • alain has but one drum left in his arsenal of BS (albeit a desperately obscure drum) and as the good ship MTM Titanic sinks, he stands their with honour going down with the ship and beating it (obviously beating it) ;)

  13. Oh “you” say MTM is cheaper (and faster) alain? Now there’s real conjecture at it’s core…

    Yes, as MTM stumbles from one fuck up to the next fuck up with associated cost and timeframe blowouts… we have been, and are still being, told that “fraudband (remember that’s what you all called it in 2007) would be faster and many believed it would/should be… BUT…

    Current, actual reality (as opposed to alain/reality – the undisputed king of Delimiter bannings for obvious reasons)… when taking “ALL information/costs into account”, is clearly suggesting otherwise, regarding cheaper (and also suggesting otherwise as per faster)…

    Yes but… “CP16 and SR says”… ROFL. The daily fuck up kings last plan (until next inevitable blunder is added and there’s a new fuck up plan) has proven to be a complete joke and ergo, means SFA.

    And shh always just talk about “basic one on one cost comparisons”, between the obviously inferior “fraudband” network and the obviously superior FttP network. Not costs vs. benefits comparisons between the two (we only relentlessly harped on about CBA before MTM – we aren’t really interested in the B) so no need to mention CBA any more and never mention the other $B’s (maybe 10’s of $B’s) of additional costs for MTM in OPEX, over the build period.

    Keep beating alain.

    You’re welcome.

    • Rizz aka Alex aka NBN Alex aka RS aka Derek O aka djos etc etc,

      Keep dancing around that maypole all you like, there is nothing new about the latest so called copper ‘blowout’, it was in the FTTN CPP figure published in the CP 16 August this year.

      So was this estimate, peak funding for FTTP $74B- $84B with a finish date 2026-2028.

      “Not costs vs. benefits comparisons between the two (we only relentlessly harped on about CBA before MTM – we aren’t really interested in the B) so no need to mention CBA any more and never mention the other $B’s (maybe 10’s of $B’s) of additional costs for MTM in OPEX, over the build period.”

      No comparative figures of course but at least you are partly factual, the key word in that statement is ‘maybe’.

      You really need to work harder, I suggest you direct your energy into advice as to what the Labor NBN 2016 Plan should look like, Clare and his team must be really scratching their heads about what to do about that one, perhaps just leave it at each Labor MP doing their own ‘scaremongering pamphlet’ independently, repeat the ad hoc approach campaign from 2013.

      Well it worked for the Coalition.

      • Ok alain, advocate, node for me, RS, Tosh, Hitler, Mary Poppins, Captain Insano, John Holmes, Tony Abbott’s helmet polisher … see I can be DICK too… *FFS*

        So sans the complete childish idiocy… do you want to try to move past such childishness and correspond in reply rationally, even once?

        Yes or no?

        I am proposing you and I speak sensibly and calmly about the issue of MTM vs. FttP now…

        1. Do you want to? Yes or no?

        I’ll probably regret this … but here’s your chance to look past the politics, as I am throwing you a rationality bone once and once only… accept it and speak as a rational human being about the topics sans all of the BS or have your contradictions ridiculed forever more…

        The ball is in your court…

        Ok, I think after you bagging the previous mob for altering their pre-election NBN plans and now completely sanctioning the current mob for altering their pre-election NBN plans, we can both agree that although governments come to power promising one thing that sometimes, they either tell porkies to gain power or have to (due to circumstances) change tack..

        2. Can we agree that politicians Lab/Lib both do that… yes or no?

        If the answer is yes , please stop the but they promised, as will I.

        Ok possible progress…

        Now on the topic of pre-election promises/changes, Malcolm promised a fully costed MTM plan of $30B and 25-50mbps for all Australians by the end of 2016, didn’t he?

        3. Yes or no? It”s not a trick question, work with me, he did didn’t he we all know?

        So we the Australian’s were comparing Quigley’s superior (yet behind schedule) FttP – no one can argue FttP isn’t superior – c’mon work with me – $45B (MQ’s figures iirc) network to be completed by 2021 (give or take – again work with me, you don’t have to argue 24/7) vs. Turnbull’s inferior, but quoted as less costly $30B (so 2/3 of the cost) network which they said would be delivered 5 years earlier, by using existing infrastructure.

        4. Can we agree that’s what we were comparing, yes or no?

        But of course as we (hopefully) agreed, things change, so obviously MT’s pre-election promise has changed…as did Conroy’s.

        So as another poster alluded to previously, with the MTM now having (up to) $15B blow out in costs and timeframes also blown out to years (with some of the existing infrastructure not being able to be utilised but needing replacement) – so we are no longer comparing $30B/2016 to $45B/2021, we are now factoring MTM being as much as $56B and completed by 2020. So…

        At what point do you accept that we have crossed that line of MTM being cheaper/faster, to the degree that MTM is so minimally cheaper and faster (now – but not including future needs, upgrades or OPEX) whilst considering that it is inferior to FttP, and just say, fuck it, in that case let’s just do FttP…

        Please understand I am being totally sincere here and asking you legitimate questions, so please do likewise…

        Thank you.

        • Hello… alain, the man who must answer the questions not asked, but avoids the questions asked…

          Actual reality a bit too rational, hard and awkward for you, eh?

  14. Reality
    “So the estimate peak funding for FTTP $74B – $84B with a finished date 2026 -2028

    So you have done a counterfactual based on restarting, not on what the actual cost and rollout would have been if you had kept going.;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%22committees/commsen/5da16dd3-ceb5-45be-994e-c57ab82d8e67/0000%22

  15. So you have copied what I quoted from CP 16 then provided a link to massive 67 page content link to a Senate estimates PDF, as if it is a counter without any further comment or summary from you.

    But hey it looks good because jeez there’s a lot of wide ranging NBN subject matter in those 67 pages discussing the NBN and most Delimiter readers won’t bother reading past the 1st page, and you know that.

    So which particular statement among the NBN subject matters discussed at the Senate estimates are you referring to that has direct relevance to the FTTP funding and finish dates estimates from CP16?

  16. Reality
    Becuase those figures you have quoted is for if labor gets into the next election cans MTM and goes back to FTTP as per the quote I have provided and the link to the senate hearing. But we both know labor is not doing that so those figures are irrelevant.

    But on the same page of those figures is this quote.
    “no better estimates exist than the assumptions applied in the Strategic Review dated December 2013.”

    So again if turn had continued rolling out FTTP could have done it got $8B than this mess for go for HFC/FTTP senario 4 come out cheaper than the mess we have now.

    But I know you you have trouble with big words as with your pre election HFC claim lol

    • No comment or summary as to the reasons or what subject in the 64 page PDF you are referring to?

      I don’t know why you bothered with the Senate estimates link, I assume therefore it was irrelevant and just a ‘hey no one will read this but it looks good’ useless diversion.

      • Reality
        You really have trouble with big words don’t you as I will try and dum it down for you as I know counterfactual is a really big word for you to understand.

        “So you have done a counterfactual based on restarting, not on what the actual cost and rollout would have been if you had kept going.”
        The $74B – $84B. Y2026-y2028. For FTTP
        In The CP16. Is. For The Restart Of
        FTTP eg. Stop rollling Out. MTM
        And. Start. To. Deploy. Only. FTTP

        • Yes and the point is what, you also ignore greenfields FTTP which is Coalition policy as well as Labor, and not based on a restart it just kept going beyond 2013 that FTTP CPP is still more expensive than FTTN and HFC.

          oh yeah.

          • And “once again” for those with absolutely no capacity to see or state anything but what the are told they can see and state, the rusty 89 Commodore is also cheaper than a new HSV…

            What a revelation eh?

            So WTF is your continued blithering for… oh sorry of course.

            But I covered all of this above, in my questions to you, which you disgracefully whimpered off without a word from.

            It dealt with this scenario (no not the scenarios you know SFA about…ROFL) but this very scenario – your most recent ridiculous claims of FttN/HFC is cheaper than FttP, “stated typically from CP16, lol, and childishly” without factoring everything (in fact cherry picking what suits and ignoring the rest)…. nice….

            So why don’t you grow some and reply?

            I thought not, you don’t deal in facts.

          • Bit awkward that point about greenfields FTTP CPP vs FTTN and HFC, where has Jason K gone Rizz (wink-wink), so enter Rizz stage left, plant ‘Detour this way’ sign and exit.

          • Reality my point is if the chose senario 2 FTTP instead of MTM. FTTP would have been in not $8B dearer.
            Becuase that’s not based on s restart.
            If labor was going full FTTP at the next election yes you can you the restart counter factual figures but they are not.

            You make the excuse of a 26B blow out from the pre election policy by “ohh CP get revised. so by your own logic Claire can’t state they will do FTTP for $29B and can have it complete with in 3 years. Because after election CP will get revised and everything is ok lol.

          • Poor, poor, mindless follower alain… avoiding the facts at all costs, what a sorry specimen.

          • C’mon Hotcakes we all know that one lone article our friend posts to from 2 years ago, when Renai took MT by his word and decided fuck it let’s give MT’s faster/cheaper $30B/2016 plan, a go…

            … supersedes your link and the many more recent one’s where Renai has said….

            * Please accept my apologies: I was wrong about Malcolm Turnbull

            * NBN Co should apologise to its founding father, Mike Quigley

            * NBN results show Labor’s plan is still working

            * The MTM NBN business case is unravelling by the day

            * Fifield misleads Senate on Labor’s NBN policy history

            * $641 million: NBN copper remediation costs blows out ten times

            * Behind the scenes of 24 hours of NBN HFC chaos

            And the loooong list continues v.s err, one

            Oh wait, no it doesn’t not at all.

        • Jason, personally I would not use these clowns (NBN – CP16) numbers alone, for compariing the two different network topologies.

          Don’t fall into the trap of arguing with these puppets, using their masters figures (even though you are showing them to be pretty rubbery) ;) alone…

          Like seriously, why should Mal’s mates numbers be taken as any more credible than Quigley’s. In fact the opposite should occur, IMO. After all, compare the two roll outs…

          FttP from scratch, marginally behind their own aggressive targets and on budget, as even recognised by Mal’s other mates CBA. This is in comparison to the current NBN who can’t go one day without a fuck up/cost blowout/timeframe blowout, showing their utter incompetence and doing so riding on the back of NBNCo’s backhaul and all of the other NBN foundations, in place for them already. FFS.

          Why even today, alain was boasting about the current FttP roll out… lol. And he can’t see the idiotic irony (or as I said, hypocrisy in that statement).

          But, Quigley’s were the numbers recognised as correct by the previous NBNCo and by the CBA carried out by MT’s mates…

          So I’d suggest using those vs. FttN/MTM – FRAUDBAND from CP16, if that’s where the puppets want their figures to come from and then lets see how both networks stack up.

          • I know Rizz but useing there figures makes it such a laugh as only $8B difference with Turnbull own rubbery figures from MTM to FTTP.

            Becuase I have Richard trying to ignore those figures saying it’s not apples vs apples when it is. I have reality going off on a tangent as well. But then also have reality saying the $26B blow and time frame is ok becuase cp’s change

Comments are closed.