Google Fiber shows people don’t want FTTP, says Morrow

262


news The chief executive of the NBN company this week reportedly said briefings with the team behind the Google Fiber project showed broadband users didn’t want Fibre to the Premise infrastructure or the gigabit speeds behind it, and that the NBN company was built to make money, not as a public service.

Google Fiber is a project launched by the US technology giant in February 2010. It is seeing Fibre to the Premises infrastructure to a number of locations around the United States, including Kansas City, and expansion areas such as Austin, Provo, Atlanta, Charlotte, Raleigh, Durham, Nashville, Salt Lake City and San Antonio.

The Google Fiber platform provides customers with Internet needs of up to 1Gbps for both upload and download. As at October last year, Google had some 120,000 customers on the service. In future, Google plans to offer 10Gbps speeds over the platform.

The Google Fiber model is very similar to the original Labor Fibre to the Premises model for the NBN. However, the Coalition Abbott and Turnbull Governments have substantially moved away from that model to technically inferior Fibre to the Node and HFC cable options for the NBN.

The Financial Review newspaper yesterday reported that NBN chief executive Bill Morrow had recently travelled to the US to meet with the team behind Google Fiber, as well as a large number of other key technology companies. Delimiter recommends readers click here to read the full article.

However, Morrow reportedly told the AFR that Google had told the NBN company with respect to its gigabit speeds that “customers did not use it yet” and that the FTTP rollout was only done to force other telcos to conduct similar broadband upgrades. Morrow added that people should remember the NBN was set up as an enterprise required to make money, ‘rather than as a public service’.

The NBN chief executive’s comments represent only the latest time that Morrow has publicly stated that consumers did not currently want the high-speed broadband services which the FTTP platform unlocks.

For example, in November last year, In a little-reported interview with TelecomTV published a month ago (we recommend you click here for the full article), NBN company chief Bill Morrow said it was more important to get entry-level high-speed broadband speeds to as many Australians as possible, rather than proceeding with a long-term FTTP build.

“So you want that as quick as you can get it, right? If you can say fibre-to-the-node can deliver up to 50Mbit/s for most everybody, isn’t that enough for the next 10 years to get this thing going and then, if there is more demand, then you just push fibre further down the street using the company’s profits rather than adding in more taxpayer money?” he said.

And in a separate article published in the Herald Sun newspaper earlier this week (we recommend you click here for the full article), Morrow again argued that it would be better to get better broadband to more people faster, rather than deploying FTTP.

“NBN’s current model provides the capacity we need into the foreseeable future,” he wrote.

So far, most of the NBN’s end user retail customers have taken up slower speeds (for example 25Mbps), rather than the top-end speeds available on the new infrastructure.

However, many in the technology sector dispute the claims made by Morrow and other NBN executives, as well as the Federal Government, about speed on the NBN network.

Many experts have repeatedly stated that it is a waste of resources to deploy technically inferior infrastructure as part of the NBN, arguing that it would need to be upgraded in future as broadband needs increased.

For example, Rod Tucker, Laureate Emeritus Professor at the University of Melbourne, recently told a hearing of the NBN Senate Select Committee in Parliament House in Canberra: “Exponential growth [in bandwidth] will continue … Australia’s broadband capabilities are currently about 49th in the world and by [my] projections we could hit 100th in the world, even with the NBN coming on-stream. We need to be thinking about the future.”

262 COMMENTS

    • Not almost, it is embarrassing…

      It’s no wonder Australia is considered a laughing stock (when it come to broadband)

      • Washminster, Ausminster, Versailles on Lake Blwxyz Griffin, …

        For the 2016 federal election lets see if the various pollyTICs, ah oops they won’t, can put up a plan to rightsize Canberra ACT down to about five ministries, half parliament/ pay those remaining double/ have a federal anti-corruption body along campaign finance reform, use COAG’s high end teleconferencing instead of FIFO, rotate state governors and premiers through the GG and PM roles (after upping and broadening the GST, and lowering personal and organisational income tax, stamp duty, payroll tax), mandatory and binding referendums quarterly for anything affecting x dollars/ y people/ z levels of gov not part of an election program, term limits, recall provisions, popular initiatives …

    • almost,… almost for the country that built the asian century enjoyed by the nasty lib voter who finally having gotten sick of the crack pipe and decided to rock up to ANZAC DAY to re-embrace nationalism as their once-again newly found form of solace are going to remember that their families actually died for this!

      BASICALLY-> GET READY FOR A CHANGE OF GOVERNMENT!

      No one likes copper internet around their kids neck: not even lizard faced libs minus their boring crack pipe!

    • When it comes to knowing what is good for you, America is about the last place one should look. Guns, universal health care insurance, cheques, small denomination paper currency, multiple time zones in the same state, electoral boundaries set by sitting members, voluntary voting.

      Trump support.

    • Really?

      Can you state exactly what you would do with, say, 1 Gbit/sec internet that would utilise it to it’s limits for a significant portion of your day?

      Not just burst tasks or 3 different family members sitting around watching different HD VOD’s, but a task which would use, say, 50% of the link speed for at least 50% of the day… For noting, that is ~2.6 TB of throughput over 1 Gbps. Might want to save up for some new HDD’s and a faster cache.

      This is an excellent article from a few years ago now, which does a good job of highlighting the dilemma of what to do with faster vs a sort of undiscovered country ethos of “eventually we’ll make use of it”.

      http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2013/03/google_fiber_review_nobody_knows_what_to_do_with_the_world_s_fastest_internet.html

      This was true even of Google employees, both the folks on the ground in Kansas City and the execs who are managing Google Fiber from Mountain View, Calif. “What can you do with Google Fiber?” I’d ask, and I’d often get an answer like, “Anything you want.” Technically, this is true. It’s also singularly unhelpful. During my time in Kansas, when I finally got some free time with a machine connected to Google Fiber, I couldn’t find any better answers for what I should do with it. My first instinct was to try out all the things that strain today’s Internet lines—I loaded up a lot of Web pages, I tried to stream lots of videos, and I even attempted to illegally download some movies. Those things worked perfectly well. And then I didn’t know what else to do. I had finally found the broadband nirvana I’d always dreamed about. So why was I so bored?

      The inability to anticipate the utility of Google Fiber is understandable. Thomas Watson, the legendary IBM CEO, is often quoted as having said, in 1943, “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” Similarly there’s a story that Bill Gates once declared that “640k is more memory that anyone will ever need.” These are both misquotes, but they each get at the way today’s technological needs can blind us to tomorrow’s possibilities. After all, it was true that, in the 1940s, most people didn’t need a computer. In order for us to get to a time when computers could be personal machines, we had to enter a cycle in which computers would gradually offer more and more utility, creating wider demand, which would in turn prompt more uses for PCs, and so on and so forth until we all had Windows.

      And that was written by a guy who is a technology enthusiast.

      You guys take the piss over a lack of vision, but even the people rolling Google Fibre don’t know what it takes to saturate that sort of link for the average user (or even small/medium businesses).

      • “You guys take the piss over a lack of vision, but even the people rolling Google Fibre don’t know what it takes to saturate that sort of link for the average user (or even small/medium businesses).”

        You’re right. But, thats the entire point. 15 years ago, YouTube didn’t exist. It wasn’t until nearly ubiquitous speeds of above 1Mbit were around that services like YouTube and Netflix were able to be even made a reality, Netflix began streaming services in 2007.

        The point is not that currently there aren’t applications that can saturate a 1Gbit link, it is the point is that ubiquity of those 1Gbit links will BRING the innovation and applications to use them.

        “Not just burst tasks or 3 different family members sitting around watching different HD VOD’s, but a task which would use, say, 50% of the link speed for at least 50% of the day… ”

        Ah, the typical resort of the LibTroll, discount multi-user situations because it doesn’t help your argument.

        First we started off hearing that nobody has need for even 50Mbit to their house! (We retort with multi-user households). Then it gets upgraded to nobody has need for 100Mbit to their house (still capable of being bottlenecked by multi-user households), now we’re up to having to find applications for 1Gbit? Really?

        Move the goalposts some more why don’t ya.

        • +1 R0

          Tell them to go back onto dial-up and they’ll, in “hindsight” say, don’t be ridiculous…because they have “seen dial-up become obsolete”.

          Pity they can’t do “foresight” too.

        • It’s fun dealing with a drone so tunnel visioned that they are incapable of seeing the forest for the trees…

          I have never said that there was no need or that there would be no need. I was merely addressing the “lack of vision = embarrassing” comment. It’s not embarrassing, it’s par for the course. You guys dismiss things with ridicule and disdain, as if any fricking moron can think up a hundred ways to use massive amounts of bandwidth in everyday life. Yet the best minds deploying and promoting just that can’t come up with anything that will affect more than the tiniest portions of their userbase…

          And you lot haven’t come up with anything better. Guess that puts you in the same dunce cap as Morrow…

          Sad thing is, you’re the motivated enthusiasts and the blue sky dreamers whereas Morrow is just toeing the company line. He has no real reason to try and dream up scenarios to promote a tech he’s not allowed to use, and with all the reasons to promote FTTP, you can’t. That’s embarrassing… =)

          But as long as you keep slinging insults and calling everyone LibTrolls, it’ll be okay, right? \= )

          • Right, so there was absolutely nobody sure what 100Mbit to everyone would be used for pre-YouTube right?

            Just because people sit around at a certain point in time saying “We don’t know what people will use this for” isn’t the same as saying “There is no point in building this”.

            If Google TRULY thought there was no point in building it, because they can’t come up with anything that will affect more than the tiniest portions of their userbase, they wouldn’t be spending the money doing it. They are a private company after all, only interested in profit. They wouldn’t be wasting billions in R&D and building gigabit networks if they didn’t see any profit in it.

          • @R0ninX3ph

            We had a big push to get the whole network to 1Gbps where I work, and they are now streaming virtual apps instead of installing them on each PC.

            Everyone here can now do proper VC with whiteboards and everything else you need for a proper VC meeting.

            Heck, if I had a 1Gbps at home, I could probably work from there and not have to worry about a commute each day.

            These (and others) are the things you never hear the “there is nothing that uses it” crowd bring up.

          • Tinman, of course. Because, according to Orgasmo, you have to saturate or at least use 50% of the connection all day for it to be worth it.

            Despite the fact companies are investing billions into rolling it out, they’re obviously doing it for shits and giggles or possibly out of the goodness of their heartboxes because theres nothing that users can do with it, or nothing they will be able to do with it.

      • I have symmetrical 1Gbps to my work desktop, and it save a hell of a lot of time even compared back to when it was 100Mbps (10Mbps was the pits). You also get a lot more done.

        So, it saves time/money and increases productivity.

        Also, I noticed the Slate article was from the begining of 2013, by the end of 2013 Google Fibre were saying this:

        http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/government-it/build-gigabit-broadband-and-they-will-come-google-fibre-boss-20131022-hv26t.html

        They include a quote at the end of the article from the Ofcom boss (the UK broadband regulator) which says:

        “Beyond 10 megabits it’s not obvious that increasing speeds further results in increased usage,” he said. “There’s something of a plateau.”

        Which is kind of amusing considering all the complaints their government has been making on broadband speeds in the UK lately.

        • Of course. So why hasn’t your company deployed 10G to every desktop? Obviously there would be even more substantial increases in productivity, right?

          \= )

          Or, more likely, things would plateau and the productivity returns would not match up to the obscene investment it would require.

          Again, none of which is a reason not to do something, but things that need to be considered in the grand scheme. Saying “x is faster than y”, while true, is simplistic to the point of idiocy.

          • Of course. So why hasn’t your company deployed 10G to every desktop?

            Actually, they are in the planning stage for it :p

            If you haven’t used it, you wouldn’t really know how it actually changes things/processes you do, so I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. It makes a huge difference to me (and my organisation) on a daily basis.

      • So when HFC rolled out? Exactly how long did it take for saturation to occur?

        ADSL1? Again how many people just looked at that and went “oh we won’t need that we’re fine w/ dial-up”

        And here’s the last point why lots of folks are up in arms. Our infrastructure is insanely lacking and haphazard. We have areas that are literally stuck on dial-up whilst the literal neighbour next door gets ADSL2+. We are completely backwater when it comes to infrastructure like this. The whole point was to fix this mess so we can be up to date *now*. What we are doing is building network solutions that was done *yesterday* so yes it will be “fine” once it’s built… for *todays* standards. And sure if you’re lucky that might still be “fine” once we finish in 10-15 years time. But at that point everyone would have moved on what’s fine “now” may be just pushing it once we hit 10-15 years.

        So your going to be spending billions of dollars that’s “fine” and then start looking for a solution “later” because you’re not quite close to that congestion point *yet*? Who’s going to look after that when we cross that road? who will be spending the money for the upgrade? and the bigger question will anyone actually *bother* looking for a solution/upgrade path before it gets to the same haphazard state *again*? We all know how that worked w/ our current market landscape. W/o any proper competition we’re stuck on the same cycle… milk the network for all its worth by constantly throttling and giving artificial low ceilings till we eventually hit that real ceiling.. and then just keep pushing until the ceiling is about bursting point in the seams. I mean “someone” will fix it eventually right?

      • Your comment shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how networks are used.
        By your logic all desktops in an office should be connected by 1mbit thinnet, because that way they can run the link at 50% utilisation for the whole day, ok so that’ll be 2 hours logging in and transferring the users roaming profile, use it for 4 hours, then another 2 hours to log out.
        Most links to end users sit idle most of the time, the use case for gigabit is specifically burst usage, roaming profile logon, resizing a picture in a powerpoint presentation over RDP, uploading a 2Gb cad file then downloading it to another user. All this time when the user is waiting for the network is time that can be saved with a faster network directly increasing productivity.

      • It’s not that we don’t want higher speeds, just the reality that presently in Australia its rather pointless for average users to be paying extra $$$ for high speed plans that don’t deliver any noticeable improvement for much of their on-line activities & many web pages still take 30 seconds to load.

      • REALLY. I sure do.
        Let me introduce you to some next generation applications that require gigabit broadband + cloud technology + Software Defined Networking technology!
        https://www.us-ignite.org/apps/

        Even my own tech company’s “devtest” Cloud servers in San Francisco require gigabit broadband to even get off the ground.

      • Why 50% of the link speed for 50% of the day?

        Do you utilise your current broadband that heavily?

        Here is stuff I use my 4Mbps broadband for that I wish I could do ten to a hundred times faster:

        1) Remote Desktop control of hosts at cohosting facilities
        2) Downloading the latest software for various devices such as iPhone
        3) Downloading the latest 100MB – 20GB patches or installers for software that I use
        4) Web based applications (e.g.: Google Docs) where latency is a killer
        5) Downloading podcasts in preparation for my morning commute

        Here is stuff I can’t use my 4Mbps broadband for, but would be able to use 1Gbps broadband for:

        1) Online backups
        2) Personal cloud computing (i.e.: like Dropbox but on my own service at home)
        3) Back to base CCTV monitoring
        4) Running a video streaming channel, since my ADSL has a maximum upstream speed of 256kbps
        5) Being able to send collections of RAW images home to my computer rather than lugging them around on SD cards in checked baggage and carry-on where they could get lost, stolen or damaged

        Sure, the folks running Google Fibre don’t know what it takes to saturate a link, but there’s a lot more to networks than saturating links. There’s simply getting the same job done in less time, which is far more important to most people keen on high speed broadband than having lots of download quota. There’s also the fact that fibre network equipment is far more stable and reliable than copper broadband equipment: the short of it is that your service will remain online so you can rely on it being there.

        Businesses that specialise in production of media such as graphic designers or film producers will benefit immensely from FTTP since both the business and their customer will be able to exchange high volume data in a realistic timeframe: rather than waiting half a day for the file to download (or driving across town with a USB disk), simply send the file over the Internet in a few minutes. You can send the proof to the client, have them critique it, and have a second copy sent to them on the same day!

        So just be aware that the ability to provision 1Gbps and higher speeds on FTTH/FTTP has benefits beyond simply being able to download every DVD ever published in one day.

          • True HC.

            You can always tell the difference between the people using the network for work, and those that are retired and just do email or just use it as an entertainment system like Org

          • Indeed Tinman, but that’s the problem with people like this, their insipid pea brains cant comprehend what they cant see directly in from of their faces. They have become so accustomed to the antiquated way of doing things they still view the internet as a “broadcast” system. It’s the same reason coalition clowns prefer to ignore upload speeds.

            I’m not a gamer myself but I see the value of faster upload speeds here, as I understand streaming gameplay has become popular recently, it’s like a spectator sport. There is probably an opportunity to monetise this if it hasn’t happened already (someone more knowledgeable about his subject could tell us) so when 4k or 8k gaming is a thing Australia is stuck on this clusterfuck of a network it just wont be sufficient.

  1. I’d like to actually hear from Google’s point of view of what was actually discussed.
    Why no mention of whom he spoke too?
    *cough Bill Morrow back home trip makes a quick visit to Google writes it off as business trip cough*

    • you reckon he paid for anything himself?! pfft I reckon MTM picked up that tab wholesale (unless a helicopter was involved)! official visit after all!

    • Google had already made it’s point of view clear years ago. What Morrow is saying is the complete opposite of that view.

      • Morrow heads up a company whose flagship technology offering (MTM) isn’t wanted by its customers.

        He assumes the same holds true for others.

        • “(MTM) isn’t wanted by its customers.”
          But it is wanted by certain LNP sponsors.
          MTM the gift that keeps on giving…for Telstra & Foxtel.

  2. I’ve quoted Nielsens law before and been shouted down and laughed at by the resident LibTrolls because its called a “law”, despite the fact it has been shown to be historically accurate.

    A user on 5Mbit now, 7.5 in a year, 11.25 in 2 years, 16.88 in 3 years, 25 in 4 years, 37.5 in 5 years, 56.25 in 6 years, 84.38 in 7 years, 126.5 in 8 years, 189.75 in 9 years and finally 284.63 in 10 years. How much of that will be covered by FTTN and VDSL to those premises outside the theoretical 500M that G.Fast will be capable of servicing?

    That’s even lowballing the starting point of users only wanting 5Mbit now….

      • The problem is, claiming they only have to lowball and provide 50Mbit in 10 years IS a public service, public services should provide the absolute bare minimum that users need, so that private enterprise can come in and free market that shit to get the profits from what users actually WANT.

        Thus, if they’re not acting as a public service, they should surely be rolling out speeds faster than 50Mbit in 10 years because even average users will be wanting more than 50Mbit in 5 years from now, if they’re trying to capture as much of the demand as possible to make the most money….

        So, his arguments are flawed on multiple counts.

        • “So, his arguments are flawed on multiple counts.”
          Arg, it seems like even when tackling his statements from both sides, the whole project is just completely f’d.

      • Not quite… it’s irrelevant only because the current status quo makes money and maintains power by choking/controlling speeds instead of providing a service.

        It’s much easier to just control said speed (such as when Telstra admitted back during HFC days that it was throttling speeds because they didn’t see anyone having the need for faster speeds) and maintain a status quo service as opposed to what would have been a real open market competition on services.

        “Morrow added that people should remember the NBN was set up as an enterprise required to make money, ‘rather than as a public service’.”

        Hmm… I love this new revisionist Coalition version of the NBN. Again reminds me of the Medibank Public/Private “improvements” the Libs did when Labor tried to set up universal health care. I’ll see you all in about 10-20 years again folks when we get a proper network project up again and hopefully we vote Labor back in long enough to finish the job like with Medicare.

        Why spend more money if we can make just as much or almost the same speeds! It’s the same line of thinking that led us to this whole NBN in the first place. But hey Coalition love circular logic and if it doesn’t work once (Telstra) lets try again!

    • Well I had 8Mbit/s ADSL in 2006. So it should be 461Mbit/s by now! And Gigabit by 2018. 10Gbit before 2024.

      First got 512kbps in 2000, which only slightly reduces/delays the numbers. 2016 should be 328Mbit/s, Gigabit by 2019, 10Gbit by 2025.

      Of course I still only have ~8Mbit ADSL2 that drops out when it rains.

      • Technically, you could have 461Mbit right now, I have 200Mbit fibre at my apartment here in Japan, and next month am getting a free upgrade to 1Gbit.

        So, I am well ahead of the curve for gigabit in 2018 ;-)

  3. http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/government-it/build-gigabit-broadband-and-they-will-come-google-fibre-boss-20131022-hv26t.html

    Build gigabit broadband and they will come: Google Fibre boss

    Kevin Lo, general manager of Google Fibre, said

    “There is huge consumer demand… for faster internet and we believe that faster internet speeds will lead to what we call the next chapter of the internet.”
    “We’re confident that the next 100x improvement in speeds will lead to more innovation… and our goal at Google is really to give our users and entrepreneurs alike ubiquitous access to high-speed broadband.
    “And we know that they will rise to that occasion and build those next set of gigabit applications that we can’t even imagine at this point.”

    • I read that article before I read the Financial Review one. It would be interesting if Renai was able to dig a little deeper here as they are obviously opposing statements that seem to come from the same organisation.

      Maybe the questions being asked by Bill were designed to bring about the desired response. Maybe the SMH article is an attempt by Google to force fibre installs to generate more revenue from ad views. Who knows but it would be interesting to find out.

    • The problem might be that the good people in Google fibre towns have not risen to the challenge and developed those gigabit apps. It may be because there is not a critical mass of people on high speed fibre or it maybe that few can figure out what to cost effectively and consistently up/download at those speeds. This is in no way condoning the mess which is the Malcolm Trumbull model nbn but 100mbs (or slower) symmetrical might be good enough for most people for the next decade while we wait for the current generation of school kids to work out cool tricks in gigE. Google may also have got it wrong. The future may be in compression and reduced bandwidth solutions for a mobile Internet. The concept of sitting at home and doing the internet may become as attractive as a family sing along in front of the piano.

  4. Morrow King of clowns comes up with some classics. I assume based on this GimpCo will refrain from hyping speeds greater than 1gbps on HFC on their lifestyle blog and end their FttDp trials now.

        • I think the LibTrolls have moved as far away from the CBA as they can now, claiming that CP16 is now the be-all end-all of documents related to the LNP NBN rollout.

          So, that they can continue to claim how HFC and FTTN can provide the speeds that FTTP does for less money (ignoring that the whole MTM was based on the idea we would only need 15Mbit in 2025 because of the CBA).

          Inconvenient information is just forgotten by the blinkered LibTrolls.

          • And completely dumping their previously sacred FttN (FRAUDBAND) and now embracing FttDp…

            Fucking unbelievable stupidity/subservience.

        • Definitely, why should we build a network just so people can pirate porn in 4k quicker?

          • We shouldn’t because it’s not ‘just’ for that purpose. And even if it was, the Labor NBN model was ‘user pays’ and actually getting what you pay for so it would be paid off and turning a profit.

  5. Not to mention New Zealand stats show annually 100mbps plans are almost doubling each year.

  6. I’m willing to believe that Morrow is being perfectly accurate with that Google quote. Because it makes sense – unless you’re deploying to a very specific location like Silicon Valley or San Francisco, the vast majority of residential premises you connect to aren’t going to be interested in plans providing speeds they will be unlikely to require for years. Because unless they’re connecting to servers with really serious uplink capacity over networks with tremendous available bandwidth they will never come close to making use of their plan’s performance capability. Now obviously there are going to be business customers and high performance users like IT professionals who will happily sign up for the fastest speeds available, because they will actually make use of it. But if you take that number of premises as a fraction of the total number able to subscribe (like ‘premises passed’) then it is necessarily going to be a small fraction right now. That’s the case with *any* new technology or product – you have market leaders or early adopters who ride the bleeding edge because their requirements always exceed what is commercially available, but the rest of the market follows fairly slowly, and like any bell curve the vast majority take quite a while (measured in years, maybe a decade) to catch up. That’s *normal*.

    What isn’t normal is looking at this situation and using it as an excuse not to go ahead, because it is guaranteed that if you don’t build it, *no one* will ever come. Because they can’t. Because there’s nothing to come *to*. It’s like saying the demand for aircraft flight was low because no one was flying before commercial aircraft were built, or that the demand for motor cars was non-existent because no one was buying them before both cars or bitumen roads had been made.

    As pointed out ad nauseum, bandwidth and data consumption demand is extremely predictable because actual data or real world usage has been exhaustively compiled from decades. We know that the only way those patterns will change is if humans start behaving in an entirely different way unexpectedly. In betting terms, that’s called betting against the bank. So what we see NBN Co and the LNP doing here is betting against the bank.

    Their argument for this is that it is more fiscally responsible, but that argument only holds true if you’re spending less to do something partway. First of all, it isn’t evident that they’re spending less anyway – the $44.3bn FTTP NBN cost has never been disproven, while we know the MTM may cost up to $56bn by their own admission (and the fact they are being so opaque with facts leaves the possibility for further blowouts). They’re also not going part-way, they’re building something that will have to be scrapped and replaced, at a cost of more than half the cost of their original partial network. That’s not fiscally responsible, that is the very definition of irresponsible.

    And then there’s the impact their changes are having on profitability. We’ve already seen public discussion of a discounted sale of the NBN because it will be unable to turn a profit, therefore it will have to have a discounted sale price. The fact is the ROI on the MTM cannot be positive because all the profit making potential from the highest RPU products has been eliminated – those products do not and cannot exist.

    So the changes they have made are not prudent, they are not responsible and conservative, they have been irresponsible, destructive, wasteful and the fact that they have been made contrary to the facts and extensive recommendations from experts also makes the process seem both utterly incompetent and suspiciously corrupt.

    So no, Mr Morrow, your argument is a logical fallacy; it fails.

    • yeah issue is 1Gbps is ‘normal’ there and wouldn’t surprise me if they said there’s not as much demand for the 10gbps etc which is probably true … now.

    • “the $44.3bn FTTP NBN cost has never been disproven”

      What do you mean Turnbull was completely on the ball with his blow out predictions.. starting from 50-70 billion to eventually the tried and tested 100billion figure!

      If the guy who created OZ internet said so it must be truth!

      *ahem*
      The problem is not whether you can prove or disprove a figure. It’s about how much FUD you can aim at a figure w/ the help of the media. It amuses me that the 100 billion blow out was taken at word value and repeated over and over again by every media outlet out there. And yet here we have documented blow outs by the companies own accounting from the “cheaper” 20billion or less to almost 56billion and not one peep outside 1 or 2 business articles buried in the middle of the paper somewhere…

      • “not one peep outside 1 or 2 business articles buried in the middle of the paper somewhere”

        Not overly surprising when the MSM have vested interests in keeping the NBN as slow as possible, so their consortium mates can overbuild FTTN with FTTP in the most profitable areas and monopolise the shite out of it.

  7. “briefings with the team behind the Google Fiber project showed broadband users didn’t want Fibre to the Premise infrastructure or the gigabit speeds behind it”

    Oh really Mr Morrow?

    Please explain why Google is providing gigabit services to those in public housing then (for free, described as one of their leading initiatives)…

    http://googlefiberblog.blogspot.com.au/2016/02/connecthome-gigabit.html

    Mr Morrow spends more time trying to convince the public that FTTP is not needed, than actually getting on and building the damn thing it seems.

  8. “No one’s driving on 10-lane freeways today, right now, this second, so we might as well build this new road as a single dirt lane. That way, we can come back to it in 20 years’ time when it’s completely congested and 15 times more expensive to expand. After all, we’re here to make money today, not serve the public for the future.”

  9. The thing that bothers me the most, is how politically motivated this press engagement is. It’s irrelevant for Bill Morrow to be having this contrarian position on FTTP, since they are not doing it. It’s political, and it should not be tolerated.

  10. Oh look, snake oil salesman tells lies to sell his snake oil……… Lies, why bother reporting this crap?

  11. “The Google Fiber model is very similar to the original Labor Fibre to the Premises model for the NBN.”

    Google Fibre is not even close to being similar to Labor’s NBN.

    Labor’s NBN covers 100% of Australia (93% of premises with fibre with the rest covered by fixed wireless and satellite) and NBN Co is owned by the government.

    Google Fibre has been rolled out only to selected metro areas and is a private company.

    It is for that reason that Google can offer (last I heard) gigabit retail plans for about $80 a month whereas NBN Co can only offer wholesale plans for at least $150 a month. Obviously retail prices will be a lot higher under Australia’s NBN.

    Labor’s 2012-15 corporate plan (pg 64) predicted that less than 1% of users would be at gigabit speeds by 2028. The design of Labor’s NBN is such that 1 Gbps will be unaffordable for the majority of Australians.

    • Labor’s 2012-15 corporate plan (pg 64) predicted that less than 1% of users would be at gigabit speeds by 2028.

      False. If you insist on taking corporate plans for infrastructure roll outs that no longer exist as gospel you should at least get the figures right. 3%. 3% in 2028. 1% was in 2025.

          • Such an unintelligent personal attack; perfectly in line with Delimiters forums policy apparently.

            Maybe I should just go around calling everyone else names too?

            It’s kind of like how monkeys fling poop at people.

          • “It’s kind of like how monkeys fling poop at people”

            Pot, kettle, black?

            I was replying to Hubert, not Kingsforce, nor you.

            I’ll use whatever term I please to describe him I like, so mind your own business. It’s not like Kingsforce doesn’t regularly refer to those supporting a FTTP NBN as Leftards and the like.

            I have read Kingforce’s posts for more than 5 years, and I believe Libtroll is an accurate description of him. His posts are always Liberal biased, changing his opinion, rewriting history, to match the Liberal line of the day, he also tends to post to try and annoy people.

    • Yeah, you can get a 1000 for $70 or 100 for $50, they even offer 5 for free.

      They also plan to expand it to 7 more cities and are looking at adding another 11.

      Not bad for a private company that (according to Malcolms old company, Godman Sachs) “could connect approximately 830,000 homes a year at the cost of $1.25 billion a year”

    • costs of broadband etc in USA cannot be applied to here. (Those international cables aren’t free for one).

      • costs of broadband etc in USA cannot be applied to here.

        Which is a good thing for Malcolm, Verizon had the cost of rolling out Fios (their version of FttP) down to $690USD per house…

        • Indeed TM.

          Whilst it’s of course ok for Morrow to, err compare to the USA, to try to justify his disastrous… wait for it…

          Nodafail™ ;)

        • I’m talking about the retail costs vs what is supplied!

          USA hasn’t ever had data caps etc its always been about speed tiers and the like. Their operators don’t have to pay for international transit as the contents mostly already there etc. US RSP doesn’t have nearly as many costs as an AUS RSP etc.

    • @ Kingforce.

      And look what we have now… a mish mash, complete fuck up (years and $bs wasted) of retrograde technologies, which we are, on the one hand told will be good enough for the next decade, but on the other hand also being told the latsest add on to greatly increase speeds can/will be added…

      Why weren’t the iron wires good enough?

      *slowclap*

  12. If NBN was setup to make money, then it should have rolled out FTTP.

    It is the most future proof technology.
    It delivers the fastest speeds.
    It has the lowest operating costs.
    It has the highest return on investment.

  13. “So you want that as quick as you can get it, right? If you can say fibre-to-the-node can deliver up to 50Mbit/s for most everybody, isn’t that enough for the next 10 years to get this thing going and then, if there is more demand, then you just push fibre further down the street using the company’s profits rather than adding in more taxpayer money?”

    Or would you rather take ONE extra year, NO extra money, and get 20 times the speed, lower latency, lower ongoing costs of power and maintenance?

    • Or would you rather take ONE extra year, NO extra money, and get 20 times the speed, lower latency, lower ongoing costs of power and maintenance?

      You forgot higher ARU, so more profit too :o)

    • He’s missing one point… you don’t get that “next 10 years” because those years should be *now*. This is stuff that should have been built 10 years *back*.

      By the time it’s done your network will be at the most be giving an “average” service. Which is all fine an dandy I guess for AU Telco because that’s what we’re good for… providing something “good enough” because Aussies are good w/ making do and “sucking it in”.. great in one way that we’re fairly resilient when the going gets tough. Terrible in this instance coz we become complacent w/ shitty service as “normal”. It’s what’s let Telstra get away w/ doing crap all w/ our telecoms since privitisation.

      • Not to mention that we are apparently quite HAPPY to be paying through the nose (Aus tax anyone) in order to receive this mediocre service.

  14. It’s obvious that Google said something about the capacity not being fully utilised by most customers, and Morrow has turned that into no customers would want out need Gigabit services.

    Of course, in 5 or so years, many Australians won’t be able to access 100Mbps services, but that isn’t a pertinent narrative.

  15. … and didn’t Vodafail lose some 1.2m customers along with 100’s of millions in losses?

    I now see why.

    • Just as an addendum, how about we compare Google’s business decisions to Bill’s, to gauge just who has their finger on the pulse more?

  16. that the NBN company was built to make money, not as a public service.

    No morrow, it bloody well was not built to make money as its primary goal, it was being built as national bloody infrastructure! That is by definition a public service!

    • +1 Derek O.

      That line from Morrow is more newsworthy than the rest of his comments. It can both make money and be a public service, which is how I saw the original NBN vision (eventually making money).

      Gives a good insight into nbn’s motivations and what direction they’ve been given from above.

      • “which is how I saw the original NBN vision (eventually making money).”
        Hell, the FTTP rollout even after being halted by the Coalition was still making a higher than expected ROI.

        • Morrow doesn’t create the concept of the NBN Co ‘needing to make money’, it is a Government of the day and NBN board goal.

          Even the Labor NBN Co had the aim for eventual privatisation and had constant reporting like the current NBN Co does in their audited Financial Reports of what year they expected to break even, and when they would be cash flow positive.

          The idea that the NBN Co should be just a ‘public service’ like Medicare is a fantasy, never has been since its inception in 2010.

          • @ alain,

            So you finally understand that FttP was going to make money?

            Oh of course you do, you did say FttP NBN can’t help but be successful because it was a monopoly… didn’t you?

            Pity about the latest “MTM FRAUDBAND – debt and delay disaster ™” monopoly though eh?

            You know, Morrow’s Nodafail™

            Feel free to use any of my supplied, factual ™ descriptions for FRAUDBAND.

            My pleasure – you’re welcome.

          • The idea that the NBN Co should be just a ‘public service’ like Medicare is a fantasy

            Why? What are your reasons for wanting it flogged off?

          • Sorry you are confusing me with the 2007-2013 Labor and the 2013 onward Coalition Governments and their NBN policies.

            lol

          • Tell me, if the point of the NBN is to make money, why did the board make changes that specifically and irrevocably undermined the NBN’s profitability? They went from 7% ROI under the FTTP plan, which was already being exceeded because ARPU on fibre had exceeded projections, to official and acknowledged 3% ROI original MTM plan when the NBN was going to cost $29.4bn. And what is the projected ROI of the MTM NBN at $56bn? With no high RPU products to sell?

            So the official, stated purpose of the NBN is something the NBN board has not, actually, pursued. Does that, then, mean they have mismanaged the company, if that was their directive and they have deliberately chosen a path counter to that?

          • No alain, the only thing you may be confused for is a Trump supporter…

            “One of the most perplexing parts of the Donald Trump experience is that his fans don’t seem to believe in anything. They hold no principles they won’t instantly abandon on a whim; they never practice what they preach, and what they preach has absolutely no relation to reality.”

            And absolutely, rightly so…

            My pleasure – you’re welcome.

          • Sorry you are confusing me with the 2007-2013 Labor and the 2013 onward Coalition Governments and their NBN policies.

            Ok, got it, you have no answer.

    • “built to make money, not as a public service.”
      Morrow was simply confused in referring to his MTM shambles as an NBN.

  17. People don’t want FTTP? I’m pretty sure people do. People might not need the gigabit speeds Google is selling right now but they will in less time than it will take for NBN to get 25mbps out to everyone here in Australia. How pathetic of Morrow to use the fact that people don’t need higher speeds of Google fibre to say that people don’t want FTTP. FTTP isn’t just about speed but also reliability because copper is just shit, and usable life of the infrastructure. But Liberals wouldn’t understand the last two. If Google rolled out their fibre here, NBN wouldn’t have any customers left to make money off. Ask anyone from the US if they think 25mbps is enough.

  18. Did people want smart phones until they were invented? Ad how long did it take for the market penetration to verge on ubiquitous? And how frequently do users trade up to current versions of the device? It’s not as if the upgrades are free.

    Why wouldn’t the head of a tech company not appreciate this development, unless he had surrendered his reason to another.

  19. So where does this latest wonder statement fit in with FttP being the end goal, according to Bill (and Mal)?

    https://delimiter.com.au/2016/01/27/morrow-hints-at-long-term-fttp-upgrade-for-mtm-nbn/

    “The chief executive of the NBN company has stated in a radio interview that the National Broadband Network will eventually go to “the same place” as Labor’s original Fibre to the Premises model through continual upgrades to the network over time…”

    Oh yes of course… FttP is the end goal around 2250 for the anally conservative backward thinkers.

    *sigh*

        • Don’t be silly, your antiquated 5G is pissweak! I’m waiting for 6G. Why should we waste money on that 5G stuff when 6G is “just around the corner”, look how quickly 4G is ending because 5G is coming!

          • Or is it “Cheaper and Quicker”? I’m not sure which is the one that refers to rollout speed.

          • Quicker, I think.

            Hell, the Edge network already covers almost 100% of Aus. Why not settle for that and fill the last <3% in with satellite?

            Just redefine broadband to 'not capable of data transfer' and Aus has its NBN, practically overnight!

            I'll take that $29.5b now, thanks.

  20. My inlaws have NBN FTTP through Telstra. They are on 25mbps as it is the “default” plan, they weren’t even aware that there were faster speeds available. I wonder how many others are in the same boat.

    • At least half wouldn’t be aware of faster speeds available on Telstras ftth . it’s pretty obscure..

    • We’re on 50Mbps NBN FW (Tower active for 18 Months) but Telstra’s site still informs us “NBN not available in your area” & offers us ADSL1 plans instead at 7k’s from exchange.

    • The default on Telstra may be 25 but the default on other companies like iPrimus and Dodo is only 12 megabits per second less than half that offered as default on Telstra, and Dodo and iPrimus are owned by M2 communications; one of the largest telecommunication juggernauts in Australia, so they must have a lot of customers too.

      People can pay $10 or so more per month if they want to; to get 25 mbps or more if they want faster but I don’t think many do.

      12 mbps unlimited on Dodo is nearly half the price of the 100 mbps unlimited plan. It’s only about $50 or $60 compared to $100 on 100 mbps.

      So there is a compelling reason to take slower speeds as possible to save money.

      • Once people become familiar with what’s available & look past those “telecommunication juggernauts” & their overpriced, restrictive ‘bundles’ they can find quite a number of flexible cheaper options that provide faster speeds & better options.
        No line rental, no contracts, no set up fees or penalties, cheap VOIP calls & a 100 GB 25Mb/s service for a similar price to what they were paying for their ADSL & phone.

  21. What’s with Morrow why is he behaving so stupid, he doesn’t have to buy into this argument, all he has to say is, I’m delivering what the current government wants, end of discussion. It was different with Quigley, neither side of government understood what he was delivering so he had to explain it.

  22. What’s with Morrow, why is he behaving so stupid, he doesn’t have to buy into this argument, all he has to say is, I’m delivering what the current government wants and leave the explanations up to the minister. It was different with Quigley, neither side of government understood what he was delivering so he had to explain it.

  23. Seems like Morrow has completely missed the point of what Google were trying to tell him. Their main goal was to force other telcos to upgrade their networks ie; to create a universal high speed broadband network. Google gets it, the original NBN got it, the majority of Australia gets it. Only Morrow and his luddite colleagues in the LNP don’t get it. The NBN should be built not with today in mind, but tomorrow, thanks to the LNP we’ll just be playing catch up and paying for the privilege for many years to come.

    • I wouldn’t presume to say that the majority of Australia gets it. The majority of Australia’s tech community get it – but they’re a relatively small percentage of the overall population. The result of the previous election, I think, agrees with me. I hope the result of the next election agrees with you.

  24. Question: We’re not currently in a pseudo election period where an incumbent government might have to prove to a suspicious electorate why they pursued a highly technically inferior approach to broadband with questionable financial benefits, that looked a lot like ideology, are we?

    If so, perhaps ask future statements from Morrow should include the disclaimer: Authorised by the Liberal Party, Canberra.

  25. You can’t argue with the numbers. The fact is that most people choose 25/5 and 12/1 rather than 100/40. Almost no one chooses 25/10 or 50/20. Until that changes, I can understand why some people don’t think we need anything more.

    • As has been stated, many people are unaware of the higher-speed plans, therefore they are unable to choose them.

        • Given that (for example) the majority of existing Telstra customers are unaware that they can choose to migrate to nbn on a different carrier, it is hardly difficult to believe that their non-default, extremely well hidden ‘high speed’ plan options are literally unheard of.

          • Given that (for example) the majority of existing Telstra customers are unaware that they can choose to migrate to nbn on a different carrier,

            You know this how? and in 2016 you really think that the majority of BigPond NBN customers are not aware other ISP’s sell NBN plans and they can switch if they need to?

          • @Rizz

            Yeah, it’s like he doesn’t know folks just get automatically transferred to it, and that “mum and dad” average Aussies aren’t nerds like we all are…

          • @Reality: Once many Telstra subscribers became aware they have other options available then they most likely wouldn’t be Telstra subscribers for long as Telstra is famous for providing minimum product & service at maximum prices.

    • John, it’s also a fact that when doing ICT planning the standard rule of thumb for storage and bandwidth is find out today’s requirements and multiply by 2.5.

    • The whole thing is choice, if everyone had optic fibre and who ever lives at the premise can choose there speed, an old couple maybe 12/1, young people renting maybe 25/5 or 50/20 or a family with a couple of kids or running an IT business from home a 100/40 or 1gig and it won’t matter what suburb you live in. 4.5 million people live in rental accommodation, the renters are constantly changing and so is the importance of the internet depends who is renting at the time.
      In FTTN areas people choose 25/5 because once everyone migrates over to the node that’s all your guaranteed from NBN so why would you order any higher.

      • “can choose there speed, an old couple maybe 12/1”
        Forget those Maybes MikeK.
        Old retired couple in our 70’s here on NBN FW @ 50/20Mb/s & like many of our aged friends & neighbours, are using it to the Max mainly for entertainment.
        BTW, While we’re at it try differentiating between There, Their & They’re.

    • Well, from what I’ve seen, 25/10 and 50/20 are hens’ teeth. And, they cost $$$, as does 100/40. Perhaps if wholesale pricing was ever so slightly more realistic, we could afford faster speeds? After all, most plans do assume we’ll be downloading 1TB/month…

      I also note The Google Fiber platform provides customers with Internet needs of up to 1Gbps for both upload and download. Why do they get symmetrical fiber but we don’t?

      • Why are NBN dictating retail products at all? It should just be a flat access rate for the RSP to each premise, kind of like line rental, the RSP can then do what they like. Asymmetrical speeds are just something someone thought was a good idea and it stuck.

        • I suppose “reasonably priced” depends on one’s income. I did look at Skymesh, yes they are one of the few who provide 25/10. But symmetrical is only on 100. My first thought was they’ve brought in a commercial offering to keep gamers happy–at a price.

          • Not just gamers (actually, gamers don’t really need symmetric, just low pings), it’d be more productive for professionals working from home.

          • Symetrical 100 is actually a 1Gbps service (or something similar) shaped down to 100/100 etc.

            Basically they’re just connecting a higher speed upload plan and shaping it down to match a profile their customers want.

          • Simon, I think their symmetrical service is a 250/100 service shaped down to 100/100, but yeah, the idea is still the same.

      • “Well, from what I’ve seen, 25/10 and 50/20 are hens’ teeth. And, they cost $$$”
        That mostly applies to the big incumbents.
        Have a look at some of the smaller more nimble players such as NewSprout or Skymesh. On NBN FW, our POI only provides access to the former at present but we achieve a reliable service in excess of 40/15Mbps.

    • This is mostly because of Australia’s ridiculous data caps and pricing (Thanks Telstra for this!).
      In France, for example, the current standard is 1000/400 unlimited at 25 euro a month
      There’s no point in going superfast here when your quota is gone after a couple of days of enthusiastic use. With games often a 60gb download and patches 2-10gb a time, 4K video fast becoming the streaming norm and every other form of download expanding to utilise what is considered average capacities.
      We will be left behind.
      And it’s already happening.

      • “With games often a 60gb download and patches 2-10gb a time, 4K video fast becoming the streaming norm and every other form of download expanding to utilise what is considered average capacities.”

        Careful, you’ll incite the LibTrolls into claiming we don’t need to spend billions on an entertainment gaming porn network.

      • I think data caps and pricing are more to do with cost of backhaul and international transit.

        • Yes, which is why the profits from a successful and completed FTTP NBN should have been used to start another wholesale GBE, one providing reasonable international backhaul prices on a non discriminatory basis.

    • @John you also have to realise that most people are stuck with a ~6Mb connection currently so their usage is highly constrained to what that can cope with.

      Then there’s the bulk of ADSL subscribers sitting around the price point of what equates to 25/5 plan so most will end up staying at the same $ as well.

      Also with ADSL there is no tiered speeds any more you get what you can and that’s it. Unless someone is technically minded they are they mercy of the RSP’s marketing/support who if they don’t mention anything about speeds other than ‘fast’ and ‘super fast’ they’ll likely go with keep me on much of the same etc.

      • ADSL subscribers sitting around the price point of what equates to 25/5 plan…

        That’s me :)

        • Sadly myself now as well. I was thinking of 50/20 but given I can’t see a pillar in cooee of my home I’m not overly confident of the FttN speeds so I probably won’t bother and make do.

          • You might as well go with an ISP that doesnt lock you into a contract and allows speed changes, and just order a 100Mbit service for the first month and speedtest regularly, then drop down speed tiers to the one that represents the least lost speed.

            If you speed test and regularly get 65Mbit, just take the hit and drop down to 50, at least you have all the data then, rather than underestimating and being disappointed :-)

          • Oh, I’ve got FTTP, but the hit is still in the pocket and those on lower incomes must make do with lower speeds.

            Having said that, it’s a bit like the oldish Corolla (which I can afford) vs the brand new Tesla which I can’t: there’s no place in WA we can (legally) exceed 110Kp/H, and precious few you’d want to. 25/10 would indeed be useful for uploading video clips, but at the price I’m better off with /5. Hey, it’s faster than ADSL2+ at 4Km!

    • Most people don’t choose, they get transferred to the default, they’d then need to go hit the web and track down another plan.

    • Why would they pay extra for faster plans when they hear that at peak times many on those “Superfast” MTM plans struggle maintain even 10Mb/s?

  26. “Morrow added that people should remember the NBN was set up as an enterprise required to make money, ‘rather than as a public service’.”

    See what happens to you when you suck at the tit of Malcolms power. Your world gets twisted around and the words you mean aren’t the words you say.

    If there’s any chance of putting Morrow back on the strait and narrow, please get this through to your head. The NBN was supposed to be the key infrastructure driving economic growth for the next 50+ years and shrinking the divide between rural and urban Australia. A ubiquitous network would have been a seed bed for Australian innovation in IT and efficiencies across the whole economy as we got a jump start (by virtue of scale across the whole community) on other nations without the foresight to invest in such a way. All of this sounds suspiciously like “a public service”.

    Getting back to being a friend of Malcolm, I guess the $2M+ he is receiving each year for his efforts somehow isn’t coming from the taxpayer but is his just reward for all his enormously hard work. Well I guess I would need several million to suck Malcolms tit.

  27. Once you consider his statement that “the NBN company was built to make money, not as a public service”, the strategy being used and their current actions all actually make sense.

    In Labor’s FTTP model, they were rolling out infrastructure, and were fundamentally bankrolled by the government. This allowed them to plan for the future – giving us a service that would be future-proof for the foreseeable future, and actually minimising cost over time by implementing it fully (while there are big up-front costs, maintenance costs and other ongoing costs become much less).

    Furthermore, the real benefit would have been based on the fact it was practically universal country-wide infrastructure: it would have allowed new businesses, new business types and even new business models to evolve – because they would know that everyone in Australia would have easy access to good broadband. 10 to 15 years ago, who would have thought what we do, and how pervasive the internet is now? Who knows what we will be doing in the future?

    In contrast, the ‘run it as a business’ model being put forward by Morrow – the job he is there to do under Turnbull – is completely different. It’s not seen as infrastructure. It’s not seen as a service to the public. It’s seen as a product they are selling to customers.

    As such, they’re building:
    a) For what customers want right now, and maybe a few years into the future. Compared to the woeful ADSL or congested HFC that most of us have now what we have now, just about everyone would be happy with 50/20 or even 25/5.
    b) The cheapest way they can to get to that point. And by ‘cheapest’, I mean ‘cheapest up-front’. As they’re not investing in infrastructure, and don’t have the government backing they had from Labor, they want to minimise up-front costs – even if that means (literally) billions of dollars of additional ongoing maintenance costs for copper and powering nodes/etc.

    Remember, as a business, they’re not seeing themselves in it for the long haul and doing us a service – they want to build it as cheaply as possible while only meeting minimum requirements. They’re selling up in a few years anyway (probably to Telstra) so ‘long-term’ for Morrow’s NBN is 5 years.

    When we see Morrow’s actions being stupid, it is because we are comparing them to what we think it should be – whereas what he’s doing is actually quite smart, as long as you are aware that it’s no longer the same ballgame now. The whole thing is a twisted macabre doppelganger of the original – though it may look similar on the outside, it is a completely different beast guided by a completely different set of requirements.

  28. Considering Morrow drove VHA into the ground by under ordering on bandwidth I would say anything the man has to say is utterly self-serving and has no value in the debate about providing an essential service.

  29. If that is what Morrow took away from a meeting with Google and others, you must question his judgement. Just the reliability factor alone puts FTTP ahead of FTTN, although Morrow’s history is not with companies that have any focus on reliability.

  30. “People don’t want FTTP? I’m pretty sure people do.”

    I do, but would I rather have a “solid” 25/5 in under 2 months (node going in at end of street next week) ? , Or would I prefer to wait to the end 2020 (indicative timing given by NBN in response to a query by local member) to get it blazing fast? Especially pertinent question given that atm, after the rain, my speeds have dropped to under 5, from a normal 13-15, and it often takes 3 tries just to get a page loaded.

    Most people I know would rather the FTTN bird in the hand than FTTP on the “never never”, even though they understand that it will cost more in the long run. Who is to say that the FTTP would not have blown out ,as all really big projects do, so much so that whatever government is in power next year ends up cancelling it , and I am stuck on a piece of crappy rain affected copper for ever ?

    • But the FTTN rollout is currently estimated to finish one year sooner than the FTTP rollout was, and I am expecting FTTN to blow out further due to the continuing challenges with getting power to the nodes.

      So, while the FTTN plan has resulted in a reprioritisation of areas that has benefited you, there will be some who lost out and will still be waiting until the ‘never never’ just to get that 25Mbps.

      There is no reason NBN Co could not have stayed FTTP, while still reprioritising the rollout so you get done earlier, if that was part of the plan to accelerate ROI. However, for every winner on the timeline, there is a loser, since the timeline is the same.

    • “Especially pertinent question given that atm, after the rain, my speeds have dropped to under 5, from a normal 13-15, and it often takes 3 tries just to get a page loaded.”

      So do you know exactly where the rain affects your copper? Because, you had better hope it isn’t in between your house and the pillar, because then FTTN isn’t going to do anything for you, and the rain is still going to drop your speed to minimal amounts.

      Also, just because the node is at the end of your street, doesn’t mean you will have a short copper run, the node connects to the pillar, which then is connected to your house. You’d best find out where your pillar is, because according to Morrow, pillars are an average of 350m from the Nodes. So, you could still be looking at 400m of copper even though your node is at the end of your street (assuming end of the street is 50m away).

    • “Who is to say that the FTTP would not have blown out ,as all really big projects do,”
      In 6 years the estimates had increased by ~$2b (just under 5%), in 2 years of MTM the estimates had increased by just under 100%.

      • Of course those FTTP estimates are out of date, the latest estimates from CP 16 for FTTP is $74-$84B with a finish date of 2026-2028.

        • Which is not the cost for the original Labor plan, it incorporates all the money spent on the build to date, then overbuilds all the FTTN/FTTB they have built with FTTP again.

          You’ve been told this so many fucking times. Yet you still compare apples with oranges.

          • It’s the nearest you will ever get to a current estimate, because we can never go back to 2013 and carry on.

            The next FTTP estimate will be from a 2017-18 Labor NBN Co SR or CP on what it will cost and the time to completion to stop FTTN and restart FTTP, assuming that’s what they will do if they win Government.

          • I agree with you that we cannot go back in time and continue with FTTP.

            But throwing around the $74-84Bn price tag as if that is the cost that the Labor rollout was going to cost had they continued it, and not started down the path of the MTM, is completely disingenuous and you know it.

          • The nearest estimates were Quigley’s (never disproven) alain, because Quigley was rolling out FttP and was looking to streamline FttP costs (project fox)… and still keep those shhh many B’s in CBA, you ideologically illogical, simply ignore.

            Yes you never heard of project fox alain we know, just like you never heard of the scenarios…ROFL, yet you argued.. GOLD

            But these latest clowns are rolling out MTM – Morrow’s Nodafail™.

            …and have already shown they aren’t interested in cost cutting measures for the alternatives (well until the election anyway and FttDp will be the go).

            Oh well at least this latest batch of in reverse conservatives, are finally somewhat, entering the new millennium, albeit kicking and screaming.

          • The nearest estimates were Quigley’s because Quigley was rolling out FttP.

            Yeah I know but we will never know if the estimates were correct or if they needed to be revised upward in 2016 onward because we never got any where near to FTTP for 93% by 2021, in the end in terms of active FTTP residences we never really got much past the pilot stage.

          • Tinman_au,

            nbn™ “says it’s ready to switch back to fibre to the premises.”

            Well yeah, if that’s what the 2016 Labor NBN policy is that’s what they will do.
            Two big if’s though, they need to win the election and their post election NBN review process will need to tell Labor that FTTP is the most cost effective and fastest rollout model to use for the balance of FTTN and HFC? residences in 2016-2017 not yet connected.

          • ROFLMFAO alain…

            I threw that one out there (not my typical comment displaying your irrational contradictions, to simply embarrass you) and instead of your usual MIA, whimper off tail between legs, got no explanation for the erratic contradictions… within 9 fucking minutes… bang I got a reply …

            PRICELESS…

            So let’s see if you take longer than 9 minutes to address your FAILED HFC comment or how you objected to being forced onto the big bad monopoly FttP NBN but don’t object at all to being forced onto the Nodafail™ monopoly.

            Go, clock is ticking…

            But nonetheless… I’m glad you agree that Quigley’s calcs have never been disproved, won’t be disproved and are therefore the best basis for FttP costs (and shhh the B)

            “Yeah I know but we will never know if the estimates were correct…”

            So not disproved. We agree. Of course the $26.5B blow outs of MTM show they were completely incorrect…

            So Quigley’s it is… it’s unanimous.

            My pleasure – you’re welcome.

            Clock is still ticking…

          • And over an hour later still ticking, alain…

            Of course those darned FACTS are just a bit difficult for you eh?

            PRICELESS

            My pleasure – you’re welcome

          • “I rest my case…”

            I do find it hilarious, just the other day he was accusing Woolfe of disappearing because he didnt reply for 12 hours, when Reality constantly disappears when his logic falls over and he has no further retorts.

            The hypocrisy is delicious.

        • Of course those FTTP estimates are out of date, the latest estimates from CP 16 for FTTP is $74-$84B with a finish date of 2026-2028.

          How come you believe those figures?

          NBNCo was actually running under budget for the point they were at in the rollout, not over, and as Project Fox showed, they were even going to be lowering their costs further.

          They were, however, over on time, but that was mostly due to Telstra (a good 18 months hold up on the pits and pipes negotiations, and that doesn’t even take into account Telstras asbestos issues). Towards the end, the rollout was picking up just as Mike had said, and they had a grip in what targets they could actually achieve, so they lowered them (much like Malcolm did when he took over).

        • “the latest estimates from CP 16 for FTTP is $74-$84B with a finish date of 2026-2028.”
          When will you stop embarrassing yourself, Alain?

          The latest estimates from CP16 refers directly to SR13 (whose figures were cooked for obvious reasons) for Labors FTTP figures, the figures you are referring to AS YOU ARE WELL AWARE are for if MTM was dropped today and FTTP was started from the beginning.

          ERGO, since the SR13, Morrow, Turnbull and a handful of other MTM supporters all admit that FTTP is the long term goal, which will need to start being built 5-10 years after MTM is completed (oops, that was from 2016, now only 6 years max after completion, you know, until the next time MTM completion date is ‘revised’, in roughly 2.5 years from today), ERGO the CP16 figures for FTTP is the FULL COST OF THE MTM.

          Only double what Labor was on target for. Well done, Australia.

    • but would I rather have a “solid” 25/5 in under 2 months (node going in at end of street next week) ? , Or would I prefer to wait to the end 2020 (indicative timing given by NBN in response to a query by local member) to get it blazing fast?

      The assumption being that you will always be satisfied with 25/5mbps. If you know for absolute certainly that that is the speed you personally will only ever need/want I’d have to question why you are not satisfied with your current speed (presumably ADSL2+). If on the other hand you think you may want/need faster speeds in the future the question then becomes how long are you prepared to wait for that next speed increase?

      Most people I know would rather the FTTN bird in the hand than FTTP on the “never never”

      “Most people” (the ones paying the internet/phone bill every month) are adults and understand that instant gratification is not always the best thing. Children and conservatives on the other hand want it all now with no consideration for the future or possible consequences.

      and I am stuck on a piece of crappy rain affected copper for ever ?

      Depends on a few factors but if that node goes in you should assume it will be “for ever”.

    • “Most people I know would rather the FTTN bird in the hand than FTTP on the “never never”, ”

      See ‘never never’ is LNP marketing. NBN Co didn’t start rolling out FttP from the outset they had a bit over a year under Labor when rollouts were occuring

      In the 2 years they’ve been rolling fibre (includes the time under LNP) to premises they made it to well over a million homes. This is with the contractors drawing down due to contract terminations as well!

      Even the MTM documents have the rollouts completing within years of each other, that isn’t factoring in various skinny fibre or hidden project fox improvements either.

    • Diogenes… seriously.

      What about the 100’s if not 10’s of 1000’s od Aussie who would have had FttP by now but don’t have the lesser, retrograde, inferior FttN as yet?

      So much for faster eh?

  31. So Google Fibre does not endorse fibre? Who are you trying to fool Bill? Bill is just about all you are doing for Australian tax payers. Please just put your NBN on hold till Labour comes in power again and fixes up your mess. I don’t see Google Fibre rolling back to VDSL, you take the Australian people for idiots. I guess if you were running any other company you would be out long ago but your Liberal friends are propping you up.. Oh and we have all worked out why you want us on slower speeds, you want big corporates to pay huge amounts to have faster speed and protect the current market.

  32. FTTN allows households to keep their original equipment and also allows for new and different technologies to connect households. Also, the google fibre mentioned here is ten times faster than the 100Gbps that ours is being limited to.

      • Derek, given Harquebus is saying the NBN Fibre is limited to “100Gbps” I’m going to go out on a limb and say they don’t really know anything about technology so there isn’t any point in disputing their claims, they wont admit they are wrong.

        Typical LibTrolls.

        But yes, what Derek said is correct, you cannot keep your ADSL modem for VDSL. The difference isn’t just a letter in the name, they are fundamentally different technologies, so you will still require a new modem whether the rollout is FTTP or FTTN. But, only one is a network that will run for another 100 years.

        • I was replying only to the FTTN Bollocks he posted.

          But R0 you are correct, our Fibre is limited only by the electronics installed at either end – considering labs are currently playing with Terabit speeds over 100’s of km’s, I dont think we need to worry just yet about it failing to keep up.

        • He’s right about the “100Gbps” (he obviously meant 100Mbps) thing though, isn’t he? Most plans I see are limited to 100Mbps, there are no 1Gbps plans I recall seeing.

          • That was kind of my point Tinman, he is making these broad claims about technology and yet cannot even bother to get the terminology correct.

            If someone cannot be bothered to even get the terminology of their post correct, what exactly is to be gained from arguing with them?

    • FttN unless you’re lucky with an approved model already (a list of which isn’t provided) then you’re buying at least a new modem.

      Fttdp same deal + you pay the electricity costs for powering the ‘node’ directly!

      • “Fttdp same deal + you pay the electricity costs for powering the ‘node’ directly!”

        Given its a trickle of electricity required per premises, I’m not really sure it would be much more than a few dollars a year.

        If it is, then surely NBN will be required to rebate back to homeowners the amount the have provided?

        • So you should get a rebate for the electricity used in the in residence FTTP NBN Co owned NTU box as well?

          • I agree, residences shouldn’t have to pay for that either. Good idea.

            The Opex for the whole network should be covered by NBN Co, whether that be the power for the NTD, the power for FTTN or the power for FTTdp.

            Is…. is this something we actually agree on? Or are you going to be contrarian against me for shits and giggles?

          • difference is the NTD = modem you already have one of those if you want internet/ADSL. Rest of the stuff is passive optics so doesn’t need power.

  33. “the NBN company was built to make money, not as a public service”.

    Hang on it’s public money, from us the tax payer….. so if I understand this right. We pay for it, then we pay to use it, to pay back our money we used to build it, then sell it off for a profit to a company that will effectively become a monopoly. (that we could buy shares in) Isn’t that history repeating, anyone remember telecom, better known as Telstra?

    • Arguably, this was both major parties plans, neither party has hidden the fact they intend on privatising the NBN in the future.

      Only the Greens oppose it.

      • Yeah, Laissez-faire economics is a right wing thing, I’m not surprised Conroy would lean that way (being from the Christian Right of the party).

    • This isn’t anything new… you should look up the whole Medibank Public/Medibank Private thing..

      …. and here we are decades later being subjected to the same rubbish

  34. What an idiot! The reason why most people are taking on the 25/5 is not because of what they want but what they can AFFORD!

  35. I was surprised to see in Morrows photo he has two eyes but judging by the way he talks he comes across as one eyed.

    • This petition gives you ‘one last chance’ to salvage the wreck of the telecommunications infrastructure because ignoring it could quite possibly put an end to your current government’s control of the parliament.

      …. or like in the previous election it you could win you Government again, so you could actually ignore this type of petition (again).

      Here we go again same ol’ same ol’ invite yourself ‘feel good’ petitions.

  36. So taxpayers oasis for Morrow’s trip and all he did was listen to the voice in his own head. Funny how it will always confirm your suspicions, because that voice only knows what you think.

  37. This is a stunning example of a complete lack of vision and goes to the heart of why the NBN was necessary to start with. Even more stunning is the fact that the CEO of the NBN is a guy who simply doesn’t understand the role he is in. No the NBN was not originally conceived to be a profit making business. It was conceived because the incumbent had chronically underinvested in its network making the NBN an absolutely essential and necessary step in order to secure any potential future participation in the digital economy.

    Morrow’s statements are hilarious when set against Australia’s lack of vision nationally. Lets wind the clock back a bit; The government failed to structurally separate Telstra when it sold it indicating not just a lack of vision, but a lack of knowledge over basic market economics. Telstra then had no incentive to invest in its network because of its dominance in the market. Telstra also had no competing incentive to do so and simply didn’t bother to unlock the potential in its network of exchanges due to a lack of vision. Fast forward a few years and Australia is dragging far behind in the international access speed rankings to the Internet because of third world infrastructure that still sees widespread use of dial-up services since ADSL2+ is only really usable if you live within 4Km of the nearest exchange and assuming that there are enough ports in the exchange to service the request. This is what in turn forced the Labor government to initialize a project to build the infrastructure the country would need; an all FTTP network which was apparently, too visionary for the voting public who voted in a Liberal government who opted to go with the more expensive (long term since we still need to upgrade it to fibre irrespective of what Morrow believes) and shorter lived copper version of an NBN that costs almost as much to remediate, and even more to maintain all while delivering a fraction of the performance that we need in the future. The Libs then appoint a guy with no vision to head up the NBN company, while the government then launches its ill-timed, badly executed ‘ideas boom’ advertising campaign trying to encourage people with vision in a country that has demonstrated that it not only has none, but ridicules the policies of the parties and ridicules the people who do.

    That’s it in a nutshell, how the hell does anyone take anything the Lib government says seriously? This is the biggest joke I’ve seen in the last 20 years. I laugh at the Lib governments ideas boom nonsense; as its proven time and time again that not only is it not interested in future ideas, it has demonstrated that all it can do is ridicule even the notion of building infrastructure we are going to absolutely need. This is the same government that had the visionary idea of knighting Prince Philip, and they are trying to bid us a welcome to the ‘ideas boom.’ This is the same party whose prior leader declared that the Internet was a Video Entertainment system. LMFAO. I seriously can’t take anything this government does seriously at all, I just can’t! Australia’s approach to this essential infrastructure project is a collective joke. The Australian government heralding the arrival of the “Ideas Boom” is an even funnier joke when we don’t even have the collective vision to build infrastructure that we will need, never mind actually creating new ideas. Our economy hasn’t grown out of the ‘selling our rocks to China’ stage, making our economy the Neanderthal of Oceania and we think we can leap frog into an economy built on ideas and a future in digital trade? LOL. The best part of it is that we, the public are the butt of that joke because at the end of the day we have to live with it.

  38. Except Morrow is feeding ya’ll a load of BS. Google has just starting rolling out fibre to select buildings in San Francisco. The demand is there for it. People are willing to pay for it wherever it’s available. The challenge Google has in the US in rolling it out to the wider population is physical access to utility poles. AT&T and Comcast have basically locked it up.

  39. Morrow goes to Google, hands over his resume, Google laugh. We only employ visionaries and innovators.

    Morrow comes back to Australia and ridicules Google.

  40. It’s actually completely true that many people do not want FTTP nor ultra fast broadband at all and nor are they prepared to pay for it even if its sitting there ready.

    “Google Fiber shows people don’t want FTTP, says Morrow”

    My neighbour is a middle aged single woman, I’ve spoken to her about FTTP and she told me “I wish they would just leave it alone, it works fine like this” and she continued “the cost of the upgrade seems expensive to me”.

    I spoke to my other neighbour about it, more elderly married man and he said “well it would be nice to know its there if we want it” (he didn’t) and he continued “we just have a home phone”.

    So I don’t know whether others in here have actually spoken to their neighbours but unless every single one wants it or at least a very high number want it, then it’s not really worth the hassle and money, is it?

    That’s just what common sense says.

    The existing services will be upgraded under the prime ministers mixed technology model and according to my neighbours, neither of them even asked for that. They literally are happy with copper based phone and ADSL based services.

    So if we did have fibre to the premises here, they would only take up a phone service most likely from Telstra via one of the voice ports on the network termination device and for Internet they would take up the cheapest one they can find probably only 12 megabits per second. The same as they already get now, to save money.

    Watch the ABC four corners documentary on the fibre to the premises NBN and one KEY point they do mention is that the take up rate in areas that did get the network are very low.

    • I respectfully disagree.
      I know where you are coming from but the notion reminds me a little of Turnbull’s idea that users are suddenly going to depart from speed uptake and/or demand trends.
      What kind of connection is the lady next door on and if it suits her, did she reach this magic point with ADSL2 or whatever it is she has now or would she go back to low grade ADSL speeds , dial up or the like ? She might say yes but she would find that email content is richer, images are larger,pages have more content on the web and more embedded plugin stuff, lossy compression is less utilised and streaming would be out of the question except for crummy quality audio.

      The elderly guy is one of an absolutely miniscule slice of the population, look at the elderly still living in their own homes, most have smart phones and even if they don’t have a clue about setting it up themselves they will have something like skype , a smart TV or an email dedicated computer a younger relative set up for them. the last person in my extended family to get connected was 90 at the time ( a decade ago) .
      that particular family member is gone now but the next generation of elderly that followed are taking to netflix, online news,streaming their foxtel, streaming their old favourite tunes etc.

      speaking of netflix, its an example of a new service reaching Australia (forgetting people subverting geoblocking, lets talk mainstream) and being instantly ready to mop up all the bandwidth smart device toting ADSL customers can throw at it. 4K is more and more common, I had to replace my set this year and wanted to avoid it for now while the content is dry but give it two years and players besides netflix will offer content and I bet that like all their equivalent HD content it will be terribly inefficient compression compared to the voodoo netflix pull.

      the people happy not to have an internet connection unless its required to have a home phone are probably comparable to people 50 years back still wanting no home phone – might as well just run the line to the house for when they move and get everywhere done.

      copper covers the country and it is poor over our distances, fibre performance over a few hundred kms is astounding, when it’s all done and a decade passes I’m certain that any retrospective documentary on it would just surprise people that we thought it wasn’t worth doing.

      • Your disagreeing doesn’t change their view though does it? They’ve made their own mind up that they are happy with what they have they aren’t going to suddenly change their mind.

        And regards to Netflix, I agree 4K is going to be commonplace in 10 or 20 years from now, it’s the next evolution in full high definition and it is definitely not gimmick.

        Most of the cheap TVs you can buy today are only high definition and I’m not even talking about full high definition, I’m talking about 720P.

        Those are the TV’s most people are buying.

        For that matter most cheap Laptops are only 720P as well.

        People with more money are buying 1080P TV’s and laptops.

        Very very few people today are buying 4K TV’s apart from the very wealthy and those with fast enough connections to make any use of it, there will likely never be any broadcast signal in 4K due to the obscene amount of bandwidth necessary (50 – 75 mbps per stream). Most 4K sets are over $1,000.

        So to summarise 4K will exist, it will increase in take up but no where near the levels of 720P or 1080P. *Broadcast TV will never be 4K there just isn’t enough spare spectrum.*

        I respect your post because you’ve actually taken the time to think about the matter unlike some of the other less intelligent posts.

        A lot of people like my brother don’t even bother with a home Internet service at all, he can’t afford the extra monthly cost, instead he just has his mobile and uses cellular data a few gigabytes per month included with his prepaid deal.

        For people like my brother and the elderly neighbour broadcast TV is fine. He gets by.

        Also on Netflix again you can actually stream decent quality over it on between 8 to 12 megabits per second, thats enough to get a full high definition (1080P) stream, you can set the quality to ‘auto’ so that if you need to download something it will seamlessly drop back to lower quality, many people are not so obsessed with quality as you might think.

        A lot of people do only want a voice only service it could be as high as a few million customers throughout the country in that situation. Between elderly and poor and sick people those are the most likely to only want a basic phone service for calling for an ambulance or relatives or work.

        • “*Broadcast TV will never be 4K there just isn’t enough spare spectrum.*”

          Well sure…. if you’re assuming FTA will continue to exist as a broadcast service and won’t just morph into an IPTV format.

          If we had a infrastructure network spanning the whole country that could provide 25Mbit+ to everyone… Then 4K FTA TV shouldn’t be a problem at all.

        • “Very very few people today are buying 4K TV’s”

          I’d agree 12 months ago. Now the prices are way lower and the range much larger. I would go have a look again if I were you. The situation today seems to be that nearly every new model coming out is 4K and the older 1080p are being cleared out to make way.

    • You’re judging the infrastructure needs of Australia based off a “survey” of two people in a retirement village??

    • “unless every single one wants it or at least a very high number want it, then it’s not really worth the hassle and money, is it?”
      Absolutely farcical viewpoint. We’re talking communications infrastructure servicing an entirety of Australia for a lifetime (50+ years). You would argue that because your neighbours don’t drive trucks, we should have stuck to dirt roads?

      National infrastructure drives economy. There’s a whole world outside of your elderly neighbours.

      “That’s just what common sense says.”
      Yet apparently not as common as it ought to be.

      “Watch the ABC four corners documentary on the fibre to the premises NBN and one KEY point they do mention is that the take up rate in areas that did get the network are very low.”
      That would be an interesting statement to make, considering existing phone lines are switched off and 100% of Australia will either be on NBN connections or competitor mobile services after a period.

      I’d wager you took whatever they said well out of context, or completely misinterpreted it.

  41. Sure there may a lot of elderly people not interested but they certainly are in the minority in my area as most of my friends are well over 60 (I’m 72 & on 50/20 FW) & since the NBN fibre/FW arrived here nearly all of them now rely heavily on a minimum of 25Mb/s for their video communications & on-line entertainment as most consider the free to air TV content nowadays just puts them to sleep.
    A similar argument would be that we don’t need to upgrade our roads or freeways as many of the sick & elderly cant afford cars or go out much & are quite happy with just their available rail or bus services.
    We need to plan & cater for societies future needs, not stagnate in the past on outdated technology.

  42. The LNP is doing precisely that with upgrading services at the lowest possible cost to the tax payer.

    So my key point is that we need to upgrade the Internet in the most cost effective manner and the LNP is doing that.

    Bundaberg has upgraded node based services now which are a significant improvement from our prior flood damaged ADSL based services and at a fraction of the cost of full fibre to my neighbours who don’t even want it.

    The LNP is not saying ‘we won’t upgrade’ they are saying ‘we will upgrade in a fiscally sound manner’.

    • The LNP is doing precisely that with upgrading services at the lowest possible cost to the tax payer.

      False.

      upgrade the Internet in the most cost effective manner and the LNP is doing that.

      False.

      The LNP is not saying ‘we won’t upgrade’ they are saying ‘we will upgrade in a fiscally sound manner’.

      Coalition clowns saying “we will upgrade in a fiscally sound manner” actually means “we fucked up but we intend to fuck it up even more because of our political agenda”.

    • There is nothing “fiscally sound” about wasting 56 billion dollars on a short term upgrade, end of story!

      • People will generally face evacuation during a flood, as I did last time.

        Whether they built a fibre distribution hub or a node, if either of them get inundated they’re going to break they both have active switching circuitry and they both require mains power.

        NBN would dispatch techs under their maintenance contract to repair the damage and replace parts if necessary.

        Once the flood waters reach high enough levels underneath power lines the grid has to be shut down or else you can get arcing, fires, electrocution and transformers exploding so it helps the recovery to just shut everything down and let it flood so you don’t get so much infrastructure damage.

        During the recovery phase of the Bundaberg floods we had no electricity for over 2 weeks at our home.

        Mobile worked but it was hard to charge it.

        During the flood mobiles stopped working due to congestion and damage to Telstras core fibre network north of Bundaberg in a landslide.

    • “The LNP is doing precisely that with upgrading services at the lowest possible cost to the tax payer.

      So my key point is that we need to upgrade the Internet in the most cost effective manner and the LNP is doing that.”
      Labors estimated cost for their FTTP rollout was just over ~$40b. The Liberals estimated cost for their MTM rollout is $56b in the short term and just under $80b for when the end goal of FTTP is eventually rolled out. Labors plan provided a healthy return on investment. The Liberals plan now provides a negative return on investment, plus remediation costs of ~$1b per year for the next 10 years (minimum).

      I’d suggest you reassess your view of the validity of the LNP plan.

      “Bundaberg has upgraded node based services now which are a significant improvement from our prior flood damaged ADSL based services”
      Bundabergs flood damaged ADSL services used the same wiring as the VDSL services now do, and therefore is equally flood damaged – or, in the case of nbn replacing the copper with fresh wiring, WILL BECOME equally flood damaged.

      “at a fraction of the cost of full fibre to my neighbours who don’t even want it.”
      And when your neighbours die and people who aren’t against tarmac roads move in they will be required to pay somewhere between $5000-$20000 to get a connection that will actually service their needs – if nbn doesn’t take $600 for a quote and turn around and say ‘actually, it’s too hard’.

      Rolling out that same connection nation wide brings the cost of that rollout to LESS than the lowest figure mentioned above per premises, and built on government bonds whose interest fees are lower than any loan your neighbours would be able to get.

      The FTTP rollout WAS the cost effective option and the majority of short sighted Australian idiots such as yourself have gleefully shot your children and grandchildren in the feet.

      “The LNP is not saying ‘we won’t upgrade’ they are saying ‘we will upgrade in a fiscally sound manner’.”
      At a cost of DOUBLE that of the original plan.

  43. Unfortunately since the last election, most of us have come to realise that what they promised & what “the LNP is saying” is usually far removed from the reality.
    I seem to remember a promised “Fully Costed, Faster & cheaper $27 Billion Minimum 25 Mbps for all by 2016” that’s now approaching $56 Billion by 2020 for MTM compared to around $45Billion for the original NBN (unless you blindly accept Turnbull’s $95/100 Billion fairytale).
    Add to that all the extra ongoing costs & manpower required for MTM’s copper maintenance, Node batteries, power consumption, spares inventory etc it becomes rather obvious we’re now investing in a lemon.

    • Unfortunately since the last election, most of us have come to realise that what they promised & what “the LNP is saying” is usually far removed from the reality.

      Indeed Grump. Of course many of us pointing out the lies before the election but apparently even though it is obvious to all today they still manage to fool a few. As for the 25mbps for all by the end of 2016 there is 277 days to go, oh shit :-(

      • “they still manage to fool a few”
        People will believe what they want to hear. Nobody likes realising they made mistakes. In todays day and age that can get you sued. Much easier to fudge everything you said and pretend you’re right 100% of the time. No need to even improve yourself, how relaxing!

Comments are closed.