The Australian newspaper launches election attack on Labor’s NBN

191

news Murdoch-owned newspaper The Australian has published a pre-emptive article strongly attacking Labor’s new National Broadband Network policy, but without including any new information and despite the fact that the policy itself has yet to be released.

The NBN project was initiated by the Rudd and Gillard Labor Governments from 2007, although the best-known Fibre to the Premises version of the network was not formalised as a concrete project until April 2009.

Since September 2013, the Abbott and Turnbull administrations have substantially shifted the model of the network, moving away from Labor’s FTTP model and incorporating the legacy copper and HFC cable networks owned by Telstra and Optus, in a so-called “Multi-Technology Mix” approach which is technically inferior to Labor’s FTTP model.

Labor has not yet released its revised NBN policy, but Opposition Leader Bill Shorten this week said that the party saw the NBN as a “key election issue” and would shortly launch its revised NBN policy. Shorten has previously described Labor’s forthcoming policy as a “hybrid” model that would nevertheless feature a “first-rate Fibre NBN”.

Over the past several days, the Coalition appears to have kicked off a campaign designed to discredit Labor’s management of the NBN, with at least one Liberal MP relying on party-supplied material to claim that “$40 billion was wasted” during its early days.

And today The Australian newspaper joined the election campaign attack on Labor over the issue.

The newspaper published an article this morning entitled “Federal election 2016: Labor NBN model ‘to cost billions'”. Delimiter recommends readers click through to read the full article.

The article contains no new information about Labor’s policy, but instead relies on figures compiled by the NBN company under the Coalition to claim that Labor’s policy would cost between $20 billion and $30 billion more than the Coalition’s existing model.

The article quotes Kevin Morgan, a telecommunications spokesperson and consultant to the Government’s Vertigan Review of the NBN. Among other analysts such as Henry Ergas, Morgan is viewed as a long-time critic of Labor’s original FTTP version of the NBN.

The article also disparages the Fibre to the Distribution Point model which many see as a logical replacement for the Coalition’s controversial Fibre to the Node model, and which Labor is expected to support in its revised NBN policy.

The Australian newspaper emerged during the 2010 and 2013 Federal Election campaigns as a strong critic of Labor’s FTTP model for the NBN, publishing a series of articles strongly criticising the party’s policy and its implementation of the policy in Government. Murdoch stablemate newspaper The Daily Telegraph also published a number of similar articles.

However, the newspaper does not appear to have applied the same level of highly critical coverage to the Coalition’s version of the NBN, despite a series of damaging leaks about the project over the past nine months that have unearthed widespread cost and deployment issues with the Coalition’s model.

In June 2013, veteran telecommunications analyst Paul Budde sharply criticised Australia’s media for not levelling the same “malice” and “vicious media attacks” at the Coalition’s National Broadband Network policy as it had with Labor’s NBN vision, despite the fact that the two policies share a great deal of similarity.

“What amazes me is that, with the Coalition now supporting the NBN, the attacks on the NBN by the above mentioned press have slowed down considerably,” wrote Budde at the time.

“We now have an NBN plan from the Coalition that has nothing to do with ‘kill at all cost’ – it is, in fact, very much in line with the government plan. So those vicious media attacks apparently had little or nothing to do with the positives or negatives of the NBN. They were made from a purely political perspective.”

Image credit: David Shankbone, Creative Commons

191 COMMENTS

  1. Quelle surprise, The Australian/Murdoch Press is acting as marketing for the LNP, that has never happened before. /irony
    It’s fortuitous that it happens to be in defense of News Limited/Fox assets as well. I’m sure they mentioned their huge conflict of interest in this story in this report. Totally sure.

      • Indeed.

        I’ve been using LPA for the Coalition recently, with only 10 in Reps and 4 in the senate, the NPA can pretty well be ignored (apart from Barnaby’s adorable antics).

        • Other than the hat’s I don’t see a difference between National/Liberals anymore (aren’t they literally the same party now as well?).

          (and yes that’s how much attn I pay to political politics ;) ).

          • Other than the hat’s I don’t see a difference between National/Liberals anymore (aren’t they literally the same party now as well?).

            Only in Queensland (and the NT I think where they are the Country Liberal Party).

            But as the parties break down thusly:

            LPA:

            Lower – 58
            Upper – 23

            NPA:

            Lower – 10
            Upper – 4

            You can easily see how the NPA has very little relevance in modern politics.

          • I believe the Nats originally (including Barnaby) were the first to support FttP, even before Labor (iirc) and were the first to refer to FttN, as Fraudband (perhaps even because of their support for FttP, so I’d agree with them wholeheartedly if that was actually the reason).

            So yes, topically speaking, as we should… that has certainly changed drastically for the worst, IMO, as the minor Coalition partner is forced to toe the line.

      • A logical thinker! Thanks Lindy.

        The LNP IS NOT the federal government; rather it is a state party based in Queensland, some of whose members are elected to federal seats. So whilst LNP members are PART of it, they ARE NOT the federal coalition.

    • We all know Turnbull has lost the election.
      This country is a laughing stock having built China and then rewarding itself with copper internet for absolutely zero rationale.
      The kids can’t afford a house and now they can’t compete in the Asian century as mum and dad preferred to vote for paper profits… now mum and dad are looking at retirement they know voting liberal again will leave them very lonely.
      “Bye Bye Mr Harbourside McMansion.”
      –> ..more like: “Bye Bye Mr McInternet!!”

      • Who heard Sam Maidens slip of the tongue on The Project last night when she called Turnbull Mr Harbourside McMansion!??!

        Yes, she reads this blog!

        Yes, she must be following me around !!

        (😘 Obviously 😍)

  2. So private citizens get $40 billion per year of public subsidies for investing in private housing, but government investing in a public utility that enhances the worth of those same houses, nation-builds, and is a similar overall cost to just one year of private housing subsidies, [BUT with a rate of return that makes public money from this investment], is somehow now bad????. It is clear the country is being put second to a certain newspapers business model, by the use of their marketpower to essentially offload their own failed asset that was their OWN failed NBN rollout (HFC) to policy-makers. Abbott/Turnbull bought this dud product, and at the nations expense. Now it looks like ALP will as well, just to neutralise media attacks. Scandalous all round.

  3. Not surprising, The Australian are quite good at fooling the gullible and how touching that they are getting the simpleton Kevin Morgan to help them out again.

    • I had a laugh about that. He’s been missing in action for the last couple of years after collecting his $10,000 consultancy fee for contributing to the Strategic Review. Though I can’t say I blame him. I’d lay low as well after seeing the cost of the roll out double, the completion date blow out by 4 – 5 years, service levels decimated, and little if no reduction in subscriber charges. So much for level of competency of services rendered.

      But what’s really disconcerting in that article is this line …. “Some ­believe a future government should write off some of the investment to help the NBN Co turn a profit and avoid it adding to the budget deficit.”
      It’s an acknowledgement that the financial case for the NBN MTM is stuffed and to make it look better, tax payer funding should be written off as a loss. Of course – that really bites when a future LNP Govt sells off the NBN at what is effectively a loss while the private sector picks up some cheap assets – at taxpayer expense.

      This is a Liberal Govt through and through. Socialize the losses, privatize the profits, even to the point of contriving the circumstances to produce that effect.

      • Indeed Paul. The Australian sure do know their audience though and given how incestuous it is they picked the perfect guy. The gullible actually still consider him credible.

      • The budget deficit under LNP is already increasing at such a rate that even a large write down/loss on privatisation is likely to look insignificant by comparison.

  4. It’s kind of interesting that these attack pieces are always one of the few articles that aren’t behind the paywall.

  5. Murdoch-owned newspaper The Australian has published a pre-emptive article strongly attacking Labor’s new National Broadband Network policy, but without including any new information and despite the fact that the policy itself has yet to be released.

    That’s our `Stralian, never let the facts stand in the way of a good yarn.

  6. It’s like they’ve just copied & pasted the same stuff from 4 years ago…
    C’mon Annabel lift your game, your smearing is terrible.

    • Steady on – she’s just a Murdoch puppy, let out of the kennel to run around in the front yard and yap at passers by so she can earn some schmakos.
      Her boss is known as ‘the dirty digger’ after all, so it’s only natural she’ll do the same. And of course the chances are she’ll dig up some of the same old crap from years ago, sniff it, and think ‘How wonderful! Who would think that such gems of insight lay hidden underground!’
      Then of course the natural instinct is to polish it to perfection and present that now polished turd with a flourish – ‘Ta Da!’ all the while with a very satisfied, smug look on her face.

      Such is the life of those in the Murdoch kennel.

  7. It’s easy to counter, all Labor has to do is release their election policy, even though a July double dissolution election was spoken about by Turnbull well before it was official it seems Labor’s three years in opposition discussing what their next election NBN policy was going to be was put in the too hard basket, now it’s panic time.

    Their silence beyond feel good one liners about ‘more fibre’ while not daring to utter the term FTTP beyond the West Tassie pork barrel lets criticism fill the void and make policy for them.

    • Counter? They are making crap up…
      At the end of the day, the people who read the Australian don’t really care about the facts, just the party vote. The Australian is preaching to the converted, as nobody else believes what they write.

      • The Australian is preaching to the converted, as nobody else believes what they write.

        Nailed it.

      • Well if they are preaching to the converted you don’t have to worry about the influence such a article will have.

        Labor still need to release a NBN policy ASAP, the easy years of just sniping with cheap shots at the Coalition MtM from the peanut gallery are over, it’s time to explain to the Australian electorate with costing what they are going to do to fix it and by when.

        • “you don’t have to worry about the influence such a article will have”

          On the voters? No…but I do have a huge revulsion for the degradation to the once noble profession of journalism. It truly turns my stomach…

          “Labor still need to release a NBN policy ASAP”

          You mean before they have had a chance to read and analyze what the nbn is doing (remember that they just gained access to the data this week)? God, I HOPE that they don’t…that would be a Coalition thing to do.

          • Gained access to what data this week?

            What were the Labor chaired regular Senate NBN hearings for the last three years all about, just a charade?

          • “Gained access to what data this week?”

            @R given the amount of CiC and questions taken on notice and not answered pretty much any useful information.

            MTM made a mockery of the whole process so yes it really was a charade (a really bad one).

          • As Simon said…and in addition, Turnbull refused to allow Labor to question the Ministers until after the election was officially called (Sunday).

          • So what sort of data do Labor need, if they are not sure about a ‘more fibre’ vague no commitment feel good BS why say it in the first place?

          • They need to know what has already been done, what is committed to, what contracts are expiring when. Then they need to get some advice on what is possible from there…

          • lol, I see , didn’t stop them committing $29M and making the West Tassie FTTP announcement did it?

          • Sorry…are you saying you can’t tell the difference between a $29 million fulfillment of a promise and a $56 BILLION project???

            That explains much…

          • and a $56 BILLION project???

            First of all it’s not a ‘$56B project???’, but you know that, but what the heck, anti MtM rants need all the deliberate incorrect quotes of NBN Co stats you can find, the FTTN/MtM haters certainly aren’t going to correct you.

            Love it when the Coalition MtM haters and Labor apologists pretend the West Tassie announcement didn’t happen, embarrassing at around FTTP brownfield $16000 Cost per Premise eh?

            Then they have the hypocrisy to say the Coalition MtM NBN model is a political decision but anything Labor does is purely ‘technical’ and politics has nothing to do with it.

          • Love it when the Coalition MtM haters and Labor apologists pretend the West Tassie announcement didn’t happen, embarrassing at around FTTP brownfield $16000 Cost per Premise eh?

            Did you just make that up, or do you have a link for the quote?

          • @ alain

            “First of all it’s not a ‘$56B project…”

            Umm so I’ll ask you again…

            If it isn’t $56B prove it isn’t?

            GO

            Psst ask Joe, he said it was $70B…

            But you know that, but what the heck… the faithful, mindless, lap dog MTM mouths, need to forever deflect from the “most disastrously blown out, retrograde construction build in Australia’s history known as MTM” … because it’s only a number of weeks to an election and it’s becoming desperate…

            ROFLMFAO…

            You’re welcome LD.

          • “FTTP brownfield $16000 Cost per Premise eh? ”

            And you still can’t do the math…but that’s OK, neither can the Coalition.

          • “it’s not a $56B project”

            I must admit that I am being an optimist when I hope that it will stay that low…

          • Chas,

            “FTTP brownfield $16000 Cost per Premise eh? ”

            And you still can’t do the math…but that’s OK, neither can the Coalition.

            So what does your math work it out to be, you left the figure out in error.

          • And you left answering me out in error too alain?

            Oh no… that’s right, it was intentional as you have no answer to your own contradictory stupid comments and unfounded claims, so instead you run…lol

            Jeebus you ought to be faster than Usain by now… as you have been running from your own moronic contradictions now for over 5 years.

            You’re welcome

          • So what does your math work it out to be, you left the figure out in error.

            Well der dummy, as per CP16 it’s $4,387

          • Labor didn’t do the CP 16, that FTTP rollout in West Tassie was based on PB 16.

            Pork Barrel 16.

          • And again after that typically stupid comment alain, *sigh*, I’ll remind you that you again forgot to answer (lol… perpetually ran desperately to avoid) my question..

            So

            GO

          • “pretend the West Tassie announcement didn’t happen, embarrassing at around FTTP brownfield $16000 Cost per Premise eh?”
            Interesting. You believe the cost associated with that announcement has now doubled, since it was announced?

        • “Labor still need to release a NBN policy ASAP, the easy years of just sniping with cheap shots at the Coalition MtM from the peanut gallery are over”

          What like the Liberals did from 2007 until 2013?

        • @ un-reality: all Labor needs to do re NBN policy is take a page out of the LNP playbook & promise a fully costed, ready to roll faster & cheaper 100Gbps for all by 2017 while demanding a CBA on that gold-plated, wasteful MTM white elephant while keeping their own details commercial in confidence.
          It worked a treat for Mal & Tony.

          • Tinman_au ,

            No they don’t.

            Sorry Shorten said he would, based on the $29M already committed for 3 small rural towns in West Tassie it should make the Coalition MtM funding requirements look like a bargain.

          • @alain

            “Sorry Shorten said he would, based on the $29M already committed for 3 small rural towns in West Tassie it should make the Coalition MtM funding requirements look like a bargain.

            Bargain…ROFL…

            Like the 10x blown out in just 6 months to $641m for copper remediation.

            Or bargain like the $1.6B to be paid to Telstra for (FAILED – your word) HFC upgrades.

            Or the claimed as much as $1b p.a. bargain for legacy network maintenance

            Or obviously, part of the “bargain” $29.5B, err $45b-$56B, err $70B for the biggest obsolete disastrous construction in Australia’s history known as MTM…

            You’re welcome.

          • Sorry Shorten said he would

            Did he? Where?

            Or is this just another made up stat like your “FttN rolls out faster than FttP” bullshit?

        • @ alain…

          alain (Reality) 2012: “I am sure the Coalition policy is in flux because they don’t really know until election day 2013 how much NBN Co FTTH will be laid and how many residences will be using it.”

          Oh so it’s ok for one political opposition to be “in flux and wait until election day” but not the other?

          “Please explain”.

          You’re welcome.

        • “what they are going to do to fix it and by when.”
          How about YOU lecture everyone here on the best way to polish this turd?

          Everyone else : gather popcorn.

      • @c “They are making crap up”

        Be the first commenter here not to go the messenger and rebuke the (obvious) points made. Should be easy;-)

        As posted the other day the FTTHers only want information that confirms their (uninformed) opinion.

        Renai writes Kevin Morgan “is viewed as a long-time critic of Labor’s original FTTP version of the NBN”. Yet Paul Budde is described as a “veteran telecommunications analyst”. Presumably Budde’s position on the FTTH plan has been fluid;-)

        Soon quotes from Gregory and Tucker…

        • Ummm…didn’t you just write that Labor need to release their policy? Yet the Australian is writing about how much the still-not-released policy is going to cost. They absolutely MUST be inventing this crap, as it doesn’t yet exist in the real world…

        • “Be the first commenter here not to go the messenger and rebuke the (obvious) points made. Should be easy;-)”

          OK Richard …

          “Labor’s promise of a “first-rate fibre” National Broadband ­Network could leave consumers with higher internet bills or put pressure on the government to pour in more taxpayers’ money.”

          It could could it? It might not either. A comment without substance … and that’s the first sentence.

          “While Labor is yet to reveal its policy, reverting to the “Rolls-Royce” rollout of fibre-to-the-door from the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd era would cost billions of dollars more.”

          It “would” would it? Considering Labor hasn’t revealed it’s policy, how would The Australian know that? They don’t. So, another vapid comment without substance.

          “Last year, the NBN Co estimated an all-fibre fixed-line rollout would need peak funding of ­between $74 billion and $84bn — compared to $46bn to $56bn for the Turnbull model that relies heavily on copper wires for the last few hundred metres to the house.”

          Of course, The Australian forgets to mention that the all Fibre rollout calculations were the Coalitions, where they price up their solution and added a FTTP upgrade on top of it to come up with that number.

          “Kevin Morgan, a consultant to the 2014 Vertigan review, said “there is no question that an all-fibre rollout is going to push the cost up substantially”.”

          Kevin Morgran, no more needs to be said. Google the term “Kevin Morgan+NBN” and you’ll have all the evidence you’ll need of his bias.

          “The Coalition-commissioned 2013 strategic review found that under Labor’s NBN, households faced higher bills if NBN Co was to earn the promised internal rate of return. To avoid the increases and get the same return, the government could provide a direct subsidy to NBN Co, the review found.”

          Yeah … the Strategic Review. No more needs to be said about it that hasn’t already been said.

          “Last night, Labor communications spokesman Jason Clare ­insisted the strategic review “was hopelessly wrong about everything, including prices”. He said wholesale prices would be the same or lower under Labor as they would be regulated by the competition watchdog.”

          Well, at least they had a pretense of getting the other side of the story.

          “The consensus in the industry is Labor is unlikely to turn back the clock and revert to a full-fibre model. But there is concern even a minor change could lead to ­unintended consequences.”

          The consensus in the industry? And where are the masses of industry stalwarts here that make up the consensus. And exactly what “industry” are we talking about? Telecommunications? ISP’s? Wholesale network providers?

          “Indicating a return to the all-fibre model is unlikely, Mr Clare has said it would be impos­sible to “stop all the work NBN is ­currently doing” without “wasting a lot of sunk investment”.”

          I’m surprised Annabel actually used that quote … because it’s sensible enough from Clare.

          “Yesterday, Communications Minister Mitch Fifield said Labor “must come clean and tell the ­remaining seven million Australian households how much longer they will be waiting for the NBN”.”

          Well that’s disingenuous from Fifield … because the Coalition told us 2016 … no wait … 2019 … no wait … 2020. So how’s about the Coalition comes clean first Mitch?

          “Industry insiders say adding new technology such as “fibre-to-the-distribution point” — which uses a shorter copper link to points such as the driveway — will almost certainly delay the project.”

          “Industry insiders” huh? Of course, nobody willing to go on the record.

          “Ian Martin, a New Street ­Research analyst who worked on the strategic review, said the new technology was not proved, while delays would push back ­revenues.”

          Pretty bog standard stuff. But then again … the DOCSIS standard is brand new … if technology being proven was a factor .. then the bog standard fibre technologies beats the new DOCSIS standard for longevity already.

          ‘“What really drives the financial performance of networks is just how quickly you fill them with traffic and how well you monetise that traffic,” Mr Martin said.’

          Uh-huh, and most of those connections today comes from infrastructure planned and started executing under Labor. The Coalition gave us how many FTTN connections?

          ‘While NBN’s cost per premises for fibre-to-the-node is $2300, it is about $400 higher for fibre to the driveway. It’s technically feasible to deploy the technology, but replacing the entire FTTN footprint will add on time and cost.’

          Yep … however because there’s such a low footprint for FTTN, it also makes right now the best time to change things … before it gets too entrenched.

          “Some ­believe a future government should write off some of the investment to help the NBN Co turn a profit and avoid it adding to the budget deficit.”

          “Some believe” hey? Well, it is a Murdoch publication … there had to be a variation of “Some people say” in there somewhere. Of course, some people say returning to FTTP model is the best outcome for Australia as well.

          “Telcos are hoping for an end to the debate and to avoid any ­disruption to the rollout.”

          Oh I know which telco would like an end to that debate. Which one made out like a bandit under the Coalition?

          “But some point to a middle ground where Labor finetunes the Coalition’s multi-technology mix model in a way that prioritises fibre.””

          Yeah … there we go in election mode. Keep the Coalition “good idea” *spit* and fine tune it … as if it was the best way forward for Australia all along.

          ‘“That approach is possible but they will have to ensure that the pace of the rollout isn’t slowed down,” a source said.’

          A source huh? Yet another ghost quote unable to be verified. While I respect journalistic integrity … there’s no story if all you have are unnamed sources. They could be my grandmother.

          “An NBN spokesman said it was not in a position to comment on any impacts from “potential changes” in government policy.”

          Of course not.

          • That was “easy” …. a comprehensive response from anyone who might take issue should be similarly “easy”. However my scrolling thumb is now suffering from aggravated RSI :(

          • Well done. Finally a contribution.

            Several retorts; FTTH cost more than FTTN/HFC, DOCSIS3.0 has been deployed on commerical scale for years, FTTdp is slower to rollout than FTTN, dismissing everything Morgan says is stupid, Clare regulated price is a strawmen (if price below cost taxpayer bears cost), who would suggest another change to more fibre would not increase costs and slowdown the rollout?

            As posted for several years; pushing fibre further into a network costs money and takes time. The FTTHers could make the arguement such costs and delays are worth it, however many won’t even accept these basics (and why it’s fun to expose them).

          • “FTTH cost more than FTTN/HFC”

            Says the Coalition. A little more objectivity would be good here.

            “DOCSIS3.0 has been deployed on commerical scale for years”

            Except I wasn’t talking about v3.0 …. was I?

            “FTTdp is slower to rollout than FTTN”

            Says the Coalition. A little more objectivity would be good here.

            “dismissing everything Morgan says is stupid”

            Not really, considering his bias. A little more objectivity would be good here.

            “Clare regulated price is a strawmen (if price below cost taxpayer bears cost)”

            I see you building a strawman from a strawman … considering it’s based on specific information that nobody has.

            ” pushing fibre further into a network costs money and takes time.”

            Do it once … instead of twice. How’s that cost look now?

            “however many won’t even accept these basics”

            Oh geez … another Murdoch trope. “Many” is right up there with “Some people say”.

          • @m as posted exposing them is easy.

            Point to any actual deployment (I’ve shown half a dozen before discussion of others banned) that has CPP or rollout pace of FTTH even close to reusing copper last-mile.

            As posted they don’t accept the basics, continue to maintain equivalence.

          • Murdoch,

            Says the Coalition. A little more objectivity would be good here.

            No also says BT as well one of the worlds largest Telco’s deploying FTTN and FTTP in the UK, using the term ‘objectivity’ indicates you don’t any evidence that FTTP is more expensive than FTTN, but hey ‘objectivity’ sounds good, and if I repeat it over and over it sounds even better.

            Except I wasn’t talking about v3.0 …. was I?

            So what was your point about DOCSIS, do you actually have one, or are you just being objective?

            “FTTdp is slower to rollout than FTTN”

            Says the Coalition. A little more objectivity would be good here.

            ‘Objectivity’ meaning , you don’t have any evidence to the contrary.

            Not really, considering his bias. A little more objectivity would be good here.

            But of course constant bashing of MtM by other commentators can never be considered as bias.

            I see you building a strawman from a strawman … considering it’s based on specific information that nobody has.

            Which means by definition you cannot label it ‘building a strawman’ either.

            Do it once … instead of twice. How’s that cost look now?

            Sorry I missed your costing, tell us then ‘how does that cost look now’?

            Are you the speech writer for Labor NBN announcements, keep it vague and offer no facts?

          • Richard …

            “as posted exposing them is easy.”

            If you mean the Coalition’s MTM continuing BS … yes … it is.

            “Point to any actual deployment (I’ve shown half a dozen before discussion of others banned) that has CPP or rollout pace of FTTH even close to reusing copper last-mile.”

            As previously stated, many times, save time now or cost more (if you believe the Coalition, but the MTM NBNCo didn’t even do the numbers if they’d let the FTTP continue) , and redo the most extensive work required under the MTM later … the last mile.

            “As posted they don’t accept the basics”

            The basics of what exactly?

          • Reality …

            I got a response from both of you … guess I must have hit a nerve.

            “No also says BT”

            British Telecom … whose CTO has admitted that FTTN was a “huge mistake”?

            “So what was your point about DOCSIS, do you actually have one, or are you just being objective?”

            You do know that the MTM needs DOCSIS v3.1 … not 3.0. Which has only been invented in the last couple of years. GPON (FTTH) however, been around for a little longer, and is more mature.

            “‘Objectivity’ meaning , you don’t have any evidence to the contrary.”

            No, meaning that the Coalition’s “evidence” isn’t really “evidence” at all that needs to be refuted.

            “But of course constant bashing of MtM by other commentators can never be considered as bias.”

            Not really, no. If it’s a technically better solution (which even Malcolm Turnbull agreed FTTP was) then there’s no real bias in there at all. Economical bias … well … that can be spun many ways … as Henry Ergas has aptly demonstrated with the Strategic Review. Ahem … and as certain people in here try to do repeatedly in the Coalition’s favour. I find it humourous that they try, considering all needs to be done is examine how much money the NBN MTM needs to complete this warped vision of broadband to refute it.

            “Which means by definition you cannot label it ‘building a strawman’ either.”

            Sure you can. A strawman of a strawman is still a strawman. Unless we wanted to make up another term for it … like Worzel Gummidge.

            “Sorry I missed your costing, tell us then ‘how does that cost look now’?”

            Actually I don’t need to. The simple fact that we’ve gone from doing it once, to having to redo some of the same infrastructure over the last mile … has added cost to rollout … unless of course you think the last mile can be redone for free.

            “Are you the speech writer for Labor NBN announcements”

            Not really, I’m a swinging voter, and at this stage, I’m voting for neither Labor or the Coalition. That may change in the coming weeks … but I’ll only know for sure on election day.

            “keep it vague and offer no facts?”

            Oh the irony.

          • Murdoch,

            I got a response from both of you … guess I must have hit a nerve.

            So you can make misleading statements and if anyone dares to respond to you it must be because ‘I must have hit a nerve’.

            British Telecom … whose CTO has admitted that FTTN was a “huge mistake”?

            You left out a key description in his title it was the ex BT CTO, but you know that because it was a comment made way back in 2012, but you wanted to mislead to make it look as if he is the current CTO and it is a current comment.

            It’s also good to put that comment into context.

            Cochrane is an out and out evangelist for fibre broadband, and it shows in his one-sided approach to the matter. There really is no point, he says repeatedly, in rolling out anything other than fibre

            https://delimiter.com.au/2012/04/30/fttn-a-huge-mistake-says-ex-bt-cto/

            This what the current CEO of BT says about FTTP vs FTTN.

            “We have invested £3 billion ($5.9bn) but to do FTTH (fibre-to-the-home) it would have been ten times that and the speed of deployment would have been at 10 per cent at this point,” Mr Patterson said.

            http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/technology/nbn-co-unites-with-british-telecom-on-secrets-of-speed/news-story/59d1cd696ffb4bd1cabb81c4416d04a1

            You do know that the MTM needs DOCSIS v3.1 … not 3.0.

            No it doesn’t, the point the NBN Co made about DOCSIS 3.1 is if the demand is there for the faster speeds it provides they will upgrade it, the HFC component of MtM will go ahead with DOCSIS 3.0.

            No, meaning that the Coalition’s “evidence” isn’t really “evidence” at all that needs to be refuted.

            But you don’t refute it with any ‘evidence’, but that’s ok eh, because anti Coalition argument is a one way street?

            If it’s a technically better solution (which even Malcolm Turnbull agreed FTTP was) then there’s no real bias in there at all.

            All MtM options are ‘technical solutions’, including fixed wireless and improvements to satellite BB that SkyMuster offers and upgrades to HFC wit DOCSIS 3.1 and upgrades if required to FTTN with G.fast and enhancements to VDSL.

            To say there is only one ‘technical solution’ with no real bias and it is FTTP is complete rubbish.

            Oh and that statement itself shows bias.

            Economical bias … well … that can be spun many ways … as Henry Ergas has aptly demonstrated with the Strategic Review. Ahem … and as certain people in here try to do repeatedly in the Coalition’s favour.

            ahem eh, but there is no such thing as economical FTTP spin and bias I take it?

            I find it humourous that they try, considering all needs to be done is examine how much money the NBN MTM needs to complete this warped vision of broadband to refute it.

            You find that humorous do you, wait for the Labor NBN policy when they try to turn water into wine a exercise on how to incorporate the spin statement ‘more fibre’ without slowing down the rollout of adding to the burgeoning cost.

            “Sorry I missed your costing, tell us then ‘how does that cost look now’?”

            Actually I don’t need to.

            Side step for ‘I can’t’.

            “keep it vague and offer no facts?”

            Oh the irony.

            Says Murdoch, as in the second response once again you keep it vague and offer no facts.

            irony personified eh?

          • “So you can make misleading statements and if anyone dares to respond to you it must be because ‘I must have hit a nerve’.”

            I have no intention of taking your bait Reality, but suffice to say you don’t know my mindset or knowledge base well enough to make those conclusion jumps.

            “You left out a key description in his title it was the ex BT CTO, but you know that because it was a comment made way back in 2012, but you wanted to mislead to make it look as if he is the current CTO and it is a current comment.”

            No I didn’t leave it out, I thought it irrelevant … because whether he is the current CTO or not doesn’t matter. If anything, it makes it more relevant, because he said this years ago.

            “It’s also good to put that comment into context.”

            It’s Renai’s opinion, and it’s a legitimate one. That doesn’t make Cochrane wrong though.

            “This what the current CEO of BT says about FTTP vs FTTN.”

            Errrr and? You’re basing this still on the premise that doing FTTN now and upgrading later, but getting there marginally faster offsets the decades of scalability that fibre provides.

            “No it doesn’t …” (need DOCSIS v3.1)

            Errrr …

            http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-information/media-centre/media-releases/nbn-co-to-unleash-fibre-speeds-for-cable-customers.html

            Bill Morrow disagrees with you?

            “But you don’t refute it with any ‘evidence’”

            Because it’s not “evidence”. The content of that discussion has taken place here (and elsewhere) for years. I don’t know about you, but if you can come up with something new, I’ll engage. But I’m not going to repeat old arguments (including links provided) ad infinitum, because what’s the point of repeating them?

            “All MtM options are ‘technical solutions’”

            Yes, they are.

            “To say there is only one ‘technical solution’ with no real bias and it is FTTP is complete rubbish.”

            Huh? I never said there’s “one”. You added that little nugget. Lots of different ways to skin this cat, Before the 2013 election there was one, since then, there’s another.

            “Oh and that statement itself shows bias.”

            The one where you added the bias to my statement and made out like I typed it?

            “ahem eh, but there is no such thing as economical FTTP spin and bias I take it?”

            Absolutely there is. But it’s not like NBNCo and the government in power have been doing that since September 2013.

            “You find that humorous do you, wait for the Labor NBN policy when they try to turn water into wine a exercise on how to incorporate the spin statement ‘more fibre’ without slowing down the rollout of adding to the burgeoning cost.”

            No, that’s not what I found humourous. That’s just you trying to reframe my answer.

            “Side step for ‘I can’t’.”

            That’s your contribution to discussing the point? Attempt to attack a perceived point of view of mine (and getting it wrong) rather than addressing the actual point (of having to redo work and account for it’s cost to upgrade to FTTP later).

          • Great response Murdoch.

            Uh-huh, and most of those connections today comes from infrastructure planned and started executing under Labor. The Coalition gave us how many FTTN connections?

            I’m starting to wonder exactly how many FttN connections there actually are. The LPA has directed nbn™ not to break out the figures from the FttN/FttB, and I suspect it’s probably because the FttN rollout is actually a lot slower than expected, so they are lumping them into the much faster FttB rollout.

            I’d be happy to be proven wrong, but I don’t know where that data might be found. Anyone got any idea where you could find it?

          • This what the current CEO of BT says about FTTP vs FTTN.

            “We have invested £3 billion ($5.9bn) but to do FTTH (fibre-to-the-home) it would have been ten times that and the speed of deployment would have been at 10 per cent at this point,” Mr Patterson said.

            That the same CEO thats announced a “huge FTTP rollout to 2 million premises”?

            I wonder why they’d do that when it costs “ten times that and the speed of deployment would have been at 10 per cent at this point”?

            Your thoughts Reality?

          • + 1 indeed Murdoch.

            Personally, I no longer have the patience you do, to waffle through these clown irrelevant electioneering drivelling BS and then try to rationally converse with their irrational subservience and childish stupidity…

            …nowadays I simply post one of the plethora of their previous ridiculous then, and even more ridiculous now, comments… as history has proven and they are shown to now completely contradict themselves…and they disappear as they have no answer.

            It’s delicious yet simple.

            But I’ve gotta say it, sorry -1 for the name ;)

          • Thanks Woolfe, Rizz and Tinman,

            As for the name … well … I wish I had his money.

            ;-)

          • Murdoch,

            No I didn’t leave it out, I thought it irrelevant … because whether he is the current CTO or not doesn’t matter.

            Oh I see, media reports quoting those comments refer to the ‘ex CTO’ the Delimiter article even has it in large font in the headline:

            FTTN a huge “mistake”, says ex-BT CTO

            You decide to edit the report yourself and remove the ‘ex’ when quoting what he said because you think ‘doesn’t matter’.

            It matters, because a ex CTO comment from 2012 doesn’t have enough clout, that’s why you edited it out.

            It’s Renai’s opinion, and it’s a legitimate one. That doesn’t make Cochrane wrong though.

            Doesn’t make it current and what current BT management think either.

            Here is more from BT on the FTTP vs FTTN choice.

            Opeanreach’s director of network investment, Mike Galvin, said that BT would not have been able to justify the cost of deploying fibre to the premises across the UK.

            “Fibre to the cabinet is considerably cheaper. It varies from site to site, but in brownfields, it is typically four times cheaper, maybe even more,” he said.

            http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-fibre-to-the-world/
            .
            Errrr and? You’re basing this still on the premise that doing FTTN now and upgrading later, but getting there marginally faster offsets the decades of scalability that fibre provides.

            Hey that’s a new one, what’s ‘scalability of fibre’ mean?

            Bill Morrow disagrees with you?

            You have back pedaled from what you said which was:

            You do know that the MTM needs DOCSIS v3.1 … not 3.0.

            The MtM doesn’t need DOCSIS 3.1 to be viable, NBN HFC will be activated without it, they plan to upgrade it in 2017, but it doesn’t really matter if they don’t, NBN HFC will still be sold by RSP’s without it.

            …. because what’s the point of repeating them?

            Go on be daring, do it.

            Absolutely there is. But it’s not like NBNCo and the government in power have been doing that since September 2013.

            ….and even before September 2013 eh?

            “Side step for ‘I can’t’.”

            ……. and account for it’s cost to upgrade to FTTP later).

            You still have not specified what this ‘cost’ is, so I assume you still cannot.

          • Reality …

            “You decide to edit the report yourself and remove the ‘ex’ when quoting what he said because you think ‘doesn’t matter’.”

            I find it curious that you think you know the internal workings of my mind. I said that whether he’s the current or ex … it’s irrelevant .. at one stage he occupied the seat of CTO for British Telecom, notably when they were keen on FTTN.

            “It matters, because a ex CTO comment from 2012 doesn’t have enough clout, that’s why you edited it out.”

            Errr no … it actually holds more clout, because, as I alluded to earlier on … he realised that early in the piece that FTTN was a mistake.

            “Doesn’t make it current and what current BT management think either.”

            Neither of which are particularly relevant as to FTTH’s scalability and longevity versus FTTN.

            “Here is more from BT on the FTTP vs FTTN choice.”

            Cheaper … for how long?

            “Hey that’s a new one, what’s ‘scalability of fibre’ mean?”

            That fibre can scale up to terabit speeds today … without issue … and over greater distances than copper ever could. It’s the crux of the “do it once” discussion.

            Do it once, then it doesn’t matter how much speed you want for the foreseeable future … with fibre. With the copper over FTTN … that has a ceiling on it that we hit our head on years or possibly decades before we could hope to using fibre.

            “You have back pedaled from what you said which was:”

            Huh? How so?

            “The MtM doesn’t need DOCSIS 3.1 to be viable”

            Oh I see … you’re applying the metric of “viable” to that .. which is a moving target. But here’s the rub … Bill Morrow is proposing v3.1 just to try to keep pace with speeds that fibre can already offer. Just becuase v3.1 moves the ceiling a little higher only buys slightly more time than if they used v3.0.

            “NBN HFC will still be sold by RSP’s without it.”

            On if it’s kept (because who knows what’s going to happen after the election. And is it going to be good enough? We’re already paying Telstra hundreds of millions extra to make it fit for purpose. Even then, you’ve still got that ceiling we’ll be hitting our head on in the next decade (or less, depending on how fast broadband speeds increase worldwide).

            “Go on be daring, do it.”

            There isn’t enough space in here for it. If you’d like to, come on over to Whirlpool, where there’s plenty of space for us to go at it. I’m quite happy to.

            “and even before September 2013 eh?”

            Of course … politicians spin … it’s what they do.

            “You still have not specified what this ‘cost’ is, so I assume you still cannot.”

            Haven’t even bothered … because … as stated, I don’t need to … unless you think another last mile upgrade is done for free.

          • @alternate – “You still have not specified what this ‘cost’ is, so I assume you still cannot.”

            According to the Senate replies, the average cost (for the 3 folks who were able to afford it so far) to change from FTTN to FTTP has been $12,908 per premise.

          • alain: “You still have not specified what this ‘cost’ is, so I assume you still cannot.”

            Murdoch: “Haven’t even bothered … because … as stated, I don’t need to … unless you think another last mile upgrade is done for free”

            Very relevant and succinct point there indeed Murdoch, in relation to the political mouths who keep harping on about initial costs, whilst bluntly refusing to factor all costs (and shh never mention the B in cBa) … kudos.

          • Doesn’t make it current and what current BT management think either.

            Doesn’t the current management (and the “top dog” I might add) think FttP is the way to go?

            See previous link to “BT announces huge FTTP rollout to 2 million premises”…

            I guess he had a change of heart, eh Reality?

          • Chas,

            According to the Senate replies, the average cost (for the 3 folks who were able to afford it so far) to change from FTTN to FTTP has been $12,908 per premise.

            Upgrading from FTTN on a national basis to FTTP in year xxxx if required is not the same as one off quotes on a case by case basis for one or two premises under the NBN Technology Choice program.

            You know that surely?

            We have a point of comparison of the Labor ‘Technology Choice program’ for three small towns in West Tassie, it is $29M working out to about $16,000 FTTP per premise.

            FTTP ain’t cheap no matter who does it.

          • Tinman_au,

            See previous link to “BT announces huge FTTP rollout to 2 million premises”…

            You mean this announcement?

            BT 6bn Ultrafast Broadband Rollout Will Connect 12m To G.Fast Or FTTP

            http://www.lightwaveonline.com/pt/2016/05/05/bt-6bn-ultrafast-broadband-rollout-will-connect-12m-to-g-fast-or-fttp.html

            Only 2M of that 12M is FTTP, the rest is G.fast.

            BTW the FTTP target for the Coalition MtM is 2.4M premises by 2020, we are tracking well with BT.

            I guess he had a change of heart, eh Reality?

            No.

            oops again eh Tinman? you keep forgetting to do your homework.

          • @ alain.

            https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/14/bt-broadband-fibre-optic-slow-speeds

            I particularly found these parts from within interesting, as it sounds very familiar…

            “The key problem is that BT hasn’t put the money into it because it hasn’t been forced to.

            The original BT privatisation in 1984 missed the chance to create a properly competitive market in fixed phone lines by letting BT own the infrastructure as well as the phone service. It took 30 years for other suppliers to get 50% of the fixed line market. Despite the best efforts of Ofcom, its regulator, BT still effectively controls their pricing via BT Openreach, the division that looks after the infrastructure

            Compare with the electricity, gas and train businesses, where no provider owns the infrastructure; or mobile, where competition was built in from the start…

            and…

            “Rural fibre relies on government handouts to get BT to replace copper with fibre. But even those fail. A big contract in Devon and Somerset collapsed in June because BT’s “best offer” didn’t match the council’s need for 95% coverage. So who else will step up? For now, nobody. Does BT lose out? No. It doesn’t have an incentive to add more, despite any pent-up demand.

            Feel free to scour and find a word or two to pedantically and childishly argue over, rather than just taking the gist of what is being said, onboard… I’d expect no less, lol.

            You’re welcome.

          • @alternate – “We have a point of comparison of the Labor ‘Technology Choice program’ for three small towns in West Tassie, it is $29M working out to about $16,000 FTTP per premise”

            I see…so when they are forced to upgrade the FTTN to FTTP in a few years time (as even Turnbull admits they must), you think it will cost Northwards of $150 Billion?
            I must say, I had no idea that FTTN was such an expensive problem…

            In essence, your math tells you that it will cost 4 times more to upgrade FTTN to FTTP than it does to just roll out FTTP…wow.

          • oops again eh Tinman? you keep forgetting to do your homework.

            No “opps” at all. they are using g.fast over FttC, not Fttn. Totally different scenario.

            Looks like the “opps” was yours.

            Oh, and thanks for the link, I thought this bit was especially interesting:

            Just two percent of the UK has access to FTTP, which is being rolled out by CityFibre, Hyperoptic, Gigaclear and, most recently, Virgin Media.

            Critics have used this as an argument against BT’s continued ownership of Openreach, claiming BT is “sweating its copper assets” rather than investing in futureproof infrastructure that the UK needs.

            Sweating it’s copper….thats a good one :o)

          • Chas,

            I see…so when they are forced to upgrade the FTTN to FTTP

            So FTTN will require upgrading to FTTP in 2019 will it? interesting that now only 15% of residences on fixed line NBN want 100/40 and that speed tier is a falling trend.

            So despite this fact it will be a ‘forced’ upgrade in a few years.

            Get 100% on 100/40 first.

            lol

            in a few years time (as even Turnbull admits they must),

            No he didn’t.

            you think it will cost Northwards of $150 Billion?

            No.

            I must say, I had no idea that FTTN was such an expensive problem…

            It’s fast to rollout and uses a existing NBN infrastucture asset, so therefore lower CPP than FTTP, I have no idea why you think it is a ‘expensive problem’.

            In essence, your math tells you that it will cost 4 times more to upgrade FTTN to FTTP than it does to just roll out FTTP…wow.

            In essence no, I never mentioned FTTN to FTTP upgrade costs, you made that up.

          • I guess he had a change of heart, eh Reality?

            No.

            And you still haven’t explained why, you just tried to change the subject.

            When he claims:

            We have invested £3 billion ($5.9bn) but to do FTTH (fibre-to-the-home) it would have been ten times that and the speed of deployment would have been at 10 per cent at this point,” Mr Patterson said.

            Why are they spending money on FttP when it’s, apparently, so wasteful? Could it be that FttP isn’t actually as wasteful as he originally claimed, and the critics are actually right…BT is just trying to sweat more value from it’s copper which has already past it’s “Best Before” date?

          • Tinman_au,

            No “opps” at all. they are using g.fast over FttC, not Fttn. Totally different scenario.

            Tell me all about the ‘different scenario’, and why G.fast will not work here, if required.

            Why are they spending money on FttP when it’s, apparently, so wasteful?

            The NBN is spending money on FTTP as well, intended target 2.4M premises, you point is what?

          • interesting that now only 15% of residences on fixed line NBN want 100/40 and that speed tier is a falling trend.

            As I’ve pointed out three times now, that is false and I believe you are in breach of the comments policy (specifically “Comments which display a lack of rationality or reasonableness.”).

            https://delimiter.com.au/comments-policy/

          • Tinman_au

            Yes Reality?

            Tell me all about the ‘different scenario’, and why G.fast will not work here, if required.

            I’d like you to actually read my comments in the future, I’ve discussed this with you before. With FttC the copper loop is under 300m. With FttN the copper loop is over 300m and can be over a kilometer. Over 0.5mm copper, by 250m the speed that g.fast is capable off drops to 150 Mbit/s.

            Thats why g.fast is fine for FttC, but not FttN (only those close to the node will benefit).

            The NBN is spending money on FTTP as well, intended target 2.4M premises, you point is what?

            So because nbn™ is building to 2.4 premises, BT has to to? That doesn’t make sense, and isn’t even what I asked anyway.

            My actual question was why you think BT are going to “waste” money on FttP, when you’ve said the CEO says it’s 10 times slower to build, and 10 times more expensive?

          • @ alain

            Woot…

            So according to the PM who swears by FTTN but says FTTP is the end goal… in 4 years time we will need FTTP…?

            Q. How far are they behind with FTTN/MTM?

            A. 4 years.

            Oh dear…

            So again according to the PM who is currently rolling out MTM/FTTN … by the time MTM is rolled out we will already need to finance a fibre upgrade for FTTN to FTTP… which would make the current roll out (feel free to fill in the blanks alain)

            I’ll help you out…

            a) Waaaay more expensive
            b) A HUGE mistake – think EX BT CTO
            c) Out and out fucking moronic
            d) All of the above…

            Psst my tip is d)

            You’re welcome.

          • So according to the PM who swears by FTTN but says FTTP is the end goal… in 4 years time we will need FTTP…?

            Actually Rizz, that was from 2 years ago, so it would be 2-8 years now.

        • @ Richard

          Would that be the very same (Mark) Gregory you now again, without foundation, snidely deride… but previously lauded and used as your smoking gun when he said something you actually agreed with?

          Oh let me, yes that would be him, wouldn’t it?

          Funny how narcissist’s ego’s work?

          You’re welcome

          • Would that be the very same (Mark) Gregory you now again, without foundation, snidely deride… but previously lauded and used as your smoking gun when he said something you actually agreed with?

            Are you asking the ZDnet/Delimiter recognised Richard Flud [sic] “expert” about the internationally recognised broadband expert Mark Gregory Rizz?

            Inquiring minds need to know!!

          • Yes indeed Tm…

            I’d even go as far as to say I’m asking the “completely unrecognised”, but self proclaimed expert on, every fucking thing… Richard, about the “internationally recognised broadband expert Mark Gregory”.

    • Wow, 3 days into the election campaign (I dont count Sunday, the day it was announced), and we need to have seen every aspect of Labor’s campaign. What about commenting on the lack of a Comm’s policy by the Liberals? Where’s there proposal for the electorate to consider before the election?

      It wont be the same as the CP, it never is once we’re in election mode (one of the key reasons they split their real goal into 2013-2016 and 2016-2019) so where is it?

      Come to think of it, where are the Liberal policies on Defence, Science, Health, Education, and Economy while we’re at it? Why havent they all been released for public scrutiny? They knew the election was coming before Labor, and ITS BEEN THREE DAYS!!!

      • Come to think of it, where are the Liberal policies on Defence, Science, Health, Education, and Economy while we’re at it? Why havent they all been released for public scrutiny?

        If the budget was any indication of their economic plan, it’ll mostly be give cash back to rich mates and token swipes at corporations that do exactly nada for Australias bottom line.

    • They could simply claim they can roll out FTTH to all at zero cost in 2 weeks. Every bit as impossible as the shite Turnbull took to the last election.

      Sorry? Labor were in opposition? Didn’t seem the Lib’s realised and spent the whole last 3 years doing nothing but bitching.

      • Don’t bring logic, maturity and intelligence into a conversation about politics… or expect it from politicians.

    • Easy to counter ‘what’ Reality? The election attack?
      So you suggest that Labor be just like the Liberals and produce a half arsed policy which they know they can’t possibly attain? Lie through their smiling teeth to voters, knowing full well it’s BS!

      Hey! you’re right. They need to get on the phone to Murdoch and organize a policy launch from one of Sky’s studios, complete with Ummmmm – oh yeah, holographic images of some sports person. And call Jason Clare ‘Mr Internet’. That’ll counter all the crap from the LNP and the Australian for sure.

      Eazy Peazy.

  8. Surprised Murdoch doesn’t want it all FTTP at taxpayer expense before it is privatised into his conglomerate at way below cost?

  9. Deejkay 12/05/2016 at 1:42 pm

    “When is the old cu_t Murdock going to die.”
    Now would be nice,would go and piss on his grave,the SOB.

  10. Typical main stream media shills.

    Pure bias with zero substance supporting their masters (Murdock).

    Laughable ‘sources’ and references to the Strategic Review which NBN Co have even thrown out the window.

      • It was a work of fraudulent fiction to begin with and nothing in it has been proven correct!

      • Because, as you keep telling us, CP16 “revised” things from the SR. So… if CP16 is the be all end all, then surely the SR is out the window?

        If it isn’t out the window, we can still talk about it as fact, but then if we talk about it as fact, you then harp on about CP16 being the current information, but if we then talk about CP16 you then point to the SR to show how FTTP cost too much… And so on and so on.

        It is an endless loop with you and your kind.

      • Anything the current NBN Co publishes is BS, all costing and rollout predictions from Labor in the past and when we get to see Labor NBN Policy 2016 will be the gospel truth.

        The black and white simplistic bubble the Coalition MtM haters live in.

        • Yup, has absolutely nothing to do with the way newer documents are consistently showing that the SR was incorrect. Some might say fraudulently so.

          And yet the SR, a document shown as having substantial issues with actuality, is still used to attack the old NBN model.

          The black and white simplicity of the Coalition fanboys. Reality doesn’t matter, if it comes from the coalition it must be biblical in proportion, if it comes from anyone else it is clearly lies. Especially those dastardly Labor people.

          Hey Reality. Perhaps if you actually looked at things critically once in a while someone might believe you aren’t actually just a shill.

        • “the Coalition MtM haters”

          Let’s be clear, I don’t think anyone hates the Coalition, they just hate what the Coalition has done…

          • I think it tells us more about our friends irrationally warped psyche than our’s Chas…

            Seems because he hates those others bastards and will always argue against them (even to the point of many times contradicting his previous comments, to now support the very same MTM initiates he vehemently opposed as FTTP initiatives in the past, when those bastards were in charge)… that because we support FTTP those bastards implemented, we must willingly and perpetually support those bastards.

            So he can only see us as he does himself, but coming from the other angle. Yes it’s a WTF moment, and…

            It’s actually very pitiful to think anyone could view the world in such blanket, 24/7 Liberal vs. Labor terms and live their lives not only as such but seemingly not have a thought of their own which isn’t spoon fed to them by a political party…

            *shrugs*

          • Let’s be clear, I don’t think anyone hates the Coalition, they just hate what the Coalition has done…

            Personally, I used to vote Coalition, and liked them, but I don’t now, because I don’t like what they stand for currently.

            I don’t particularly like the ALP either, but I think (currently) they have a better plan to move Australia forward (if Albo had won the leadership, I’d probably be a lot firmer on them).

            Still undecided on the Greens….I like Scott, but but Richard D and the rest….not so sure…

            Guess I’m a classic slightly left of centre swinger :o)

            Interesting times…

          • @Tinman – “Still undecided on the Greens….I like Scott, but but Richard D and the rest….not so sure”

            Neither am I, but what he said about voting for a larger group of independents and avoiding the 2 majors made sense to me. I think this year I will be going with the Irish…

          • I was planning on giving the greens my 1st preferences, but if the rumors of them doing a deal with the libs in marginal labor seats are true I will put labor 1st.

            Putting conservatives ahead of labor on their how to vote cards would be a massive betrayal of progressive voters imo!

          • Thank you for the anti Coalition electioneering rant which of course has nothing to do with a NBN discussion or this particular Delimiter topic.

            Off topic and trolling? of course not.

          • I was planning on giving the greens my 1st preferences, but if the rumors of them doing a deal with the libs in marginal labor seats are true I will put labor 1st.

            Indeed.

            I’m going to take a look at the Indies….and of course #libslast

          • Ah the hypocrisy from delimiters biggest troll (devoid of reality) is once again on display for all to see!

          • Indeed Derek,

            It again demonstrates a reverse logic (so completely illogical demeanour).

            He is the first here to mention “Coalition MTM haters” to describe those who simply want better for Australia than the retrograde, complete debacle, known as MTM.

            But after having done so, then sobs about “anti Coalition electioneering rant’ and “everyone else being off topic” when responded to in kind?

            :/

          • But after having done so, then sobs about “anti Coalition electioneering rant’ and “everyone else being off topic” when responded to in kind?

            I’m not anti-Coalition.

            Actually, after reflecting on what they’ve done with the NBN, tripling the deficit, killing revenue, unwilling to cut spending, protecting the banks and finance sectors by rescinding laws to stop them ripping off more people, giving tax cuts to the wealthy and only making a token effort to stop large corps not paying tax (only after it was revealed that that was what 600 of the largest companies in Australia were doing)….yeah, I probably am anti-Coalition with the current mob…

        • @ alain…

          You tell us?

          Mal says: MTM = $29.5B fully costed ready to go… to all Aussies by 2016 (a plan you yourself told us only the other night took 2 years of SFA to even get started…lol)

          NBN and report associates: MTM = $45B (iirc) to $56B by 2020

          Joe Hockey (former Treasurer/err the money guy) says: MTM = $70B with no light at the end of the tunnel as to when…

          Copper remediation blows out x 10 to $641m in just 6 months.

          So who in their right fucking mind would believe these cretins?

          Ergo, I’ll ask you “again”

          Who (if not all of them) lied to us?

          GO

          You’re welcome.

          • You tell us?

            He won’t unless he can C&P it from elsewhere, he doesn’t think for himself, he needs “direction” from his superiors.

        • Reality states: interesting that now only 15% of residences on fixed line NBN want 100/40 and that speed tier is a falling trend.

          For a very good reason. Many of us want those high speeds but are sick of paying top dollar for so-called Superfast Broadband that for many is only available after midnight & slows to sub 3Mb/s evenings & weekends.
          I’m seriously considering cutting my monthly bill in half by dropping back to 25/5 or even 12/1 to reflect the ever increasing MTM congestion being experienced in my area regardless of which provider is chosen.

      • alain, the boy with few answers and plenty of pointless questions asks…

        “In what way have the NBN Co thrown the SR out of the window?”

        1. Pick up SR

        2. Open window

        3. Throw SR out of the open window

        Got it now?

        You’re welcome.

    • There’s a whole section in that article labeled the ‘reality’ ….. I’ve been so caught up in the Delimiter ‘reality’ I never thought there might be an alternate…. Or is someone moonlighting and it’s all been a glorious joke …… Ohhhh how we laughed 555555…

    • That article is so massively flawed. Fact checked? Pity they missed out most of the facts to be checked. Also a shame that they made claims unsupported by facts. And again IA are in there making a mess of things again. What a & #@*ing joke the media are in this country.

  11. “The Australian” is an example of exploitative journalism and I remember when they started their attack on Labor’s NBN. I consider myself reasonably knowledgeable when it comes to setting up an IT network and I keep up to date with most IT news as well. Almost every single article I read on The Australian relating to anything NBN or Labor, consisted of a mass of lies and complete lack of understanding of the content. Also with every single comment I wrote under their articles where I offered corrections, they “never” posted my comment on the article’s page. It is clear what they practice on that disgusting site has nothing to do with journalism, or reporting even half truths, it has everything to do with abusing their position of influence in the Australian media to force their political views on to Australians for what is ultimately their own personal benefit. They do it consistently and should have their licence stripped, they should be ashamed of using the word ‘Australian” in their name.

  12. Why don’t NewsCorp just put the Liberal Party logo on their masthead and stop pretending that they actually do news in a fair and balanced way?

    • Because it’d be the other way around you don’t think ol uncle rupe considers himself beneath the LNP do you?

  13. Renai, did you notice this? This appears to be telegraphing how Malcolm Turnbull intends to keep his revenue-negative slowBN off the balance sheet – writing off the cost of his two-year foray into copper:

    “Some ­believe a future government should write off some of the investment to help the NBN Co turn a profit and avoid it adding to the budget deficit.”

    Had he stayed with FTTP (or even FTTdp) he would have no such revenue hit, and would have a self-funding project that can stay off the books.

    • Had he stayed with FTTP (or even FTTdp) he would have no such revenue hit, and would have a self-funding project that can stay off the books.

      Total conjecture.

      • Devoid, conjecture based on known facts … unlike your propaganda from the magical MtM pixies!

        • Not while anyone has anything “bad” to say about FttN…no, he doesn’t. He has a point to prove that Australia doesn’t need to spend money on “plebs” while there is still more coal to be dug up (pretty well the same song book as Richard).

      • Far less conjecture with 7% ROI based on lower ARPU estimates than the actual revenue in reality, Vs a substantially reduced ROI for a project that is costing at least $10bn more, has higher operating costs, lower potential market share and no high revenue products to sell. Remember the comprehensive audit that Abbott ordered found precisely zero accounting or management irregularities, so their figures were sound. Remember, the new NBN Co’s figures are no longer published and are no longer transparently audited by independent experts. So if you want to talk about facts Vs conjecture, we *do* have a factual basis for much of the original FTTP NBN, while we have little *but* conjecture regarding the performance of the LNP’s NBN. Go on, show me where professional accountants have transparently audited and signed off on anything the NBN has published since the LNP took office.

        • Ed Zachary.

          Pretty well everything post Quigley, is bullshit of the highest order (that includes Richard “analysis” based on fabricated figures…typical for an Australian accountant).

          • Indeed TM and below is a clear example from Richard, of such sleight of hand, mixed with exaggeration and lies… for what purpose we can only surmise?

            Richard told us (in these or very similar words)…

            “since 2009, in the same time it took Australia to roll out FTTP to (I don’t recall the actual figure he quoted but it was small) the UK rolled out FTTN to 60m”.

            It does sound impressive until you add the actual figures and look at it, sans spin.

            So let’s look into it realistically…

            Between 2009-2016 is a time span of some 7 years.

            The UK has a population of 64m

            The UK is a little larger than Victoria

            FTTN was rolled out to 60m? Umm, no they rolled out to 16m (Mr numbers extraordinaire was only 44m out and only admitted to it once I prodded him with vigour).

            So let me now do as Richard did and make a statement about the UK’s FTTN roll out, but coming from the other end…

            “FTTN isn’t quick at all, it’s taken the UK a massive 7 years to roll out “quicker FTTN” to just 1/4 of their population and over a tiny area about the size of Victoria.”

            And I didn’t have to exaggerate or lie about the roll out numbers.

            I could now add alain spin to suggest that looking at the figures, they won’t be finished for another 20 years…

          • Dearest… petulant child alain…

            Yes the right decision indeed…

            https://delimiter.com.au/2016/05/11/bt-announces-huge-fttp-rollout-2-million-premises/

            BTW nice link back to your own equally imbecilic previous comment… ROFLMFAO

            Perhaps if you were to leave your backward little world of the conservative safety bubble, even for a few seconds, you could address my many actual questions previously asked of you?

            Yes the “loaded (rofl)” questions you relentlessly, limply, run tail between legs from, then instead you backwardly, meaninglessly and moronically, attempt to answer questions which were never asked.

            You’re welcome

  14. 15 posts by Reality none of them questioning your article, all he is doing is attacking everyone else who has a different opinion to his politically point of view. And between now and the election he will try and suck up all the oxygen and trample down everyone else who have a different opinion. Most of those opinions are based on facts that we all have witnessed over the last two and half years not based on political ideology.

  15. Why does Murdock reminds me so much of Chancellor Palpatine or Darth Sidious … and Abbott being Count Dooku … and Turnbull being Darth Vader ?

    God help Australia … where are the Jedis ?

    • Don’t you mean (drum roll) Bill Jedi Shorten, use the force Bill, the force, do or do not Bill. there is no try, your focus determines your reality, stay on target Bill, great, Bill. don’t get cocky.” mind tricks don’t work on me Turnbull. Never tell me the odds. your eyes can deceive you don’t trust them, I’ve got a bad feeling about this. I find your lack of faith disturbing, in my experience there is no such thing as luck, Bill has to save our skins, this is a new day, a new beginning.

    • “There are more important things to spend money on than the NBN.”
      So true Matt. Such as pollies perks, slush funds, helicopter rides & junkets, on top of subsidies & tax breaks for their supporters & donors such as the $800 million refund for Rupert etc. etc.

    • Hey Matt, are you concerned about the money spent on the NBN? Does it make your blood boil that tens of billions is being pumped into a project you had no say in? Well great! You *should* be angry. We are too. Because the original plan for the NBN would have cost you and I and every other tax payer $0. Yes, that’s zero dollars. Not a cent. Because it was funded by investment, because it was returning a positive cash flow – a profit to the investors. It did this because customers were paying for services, just like they do for ADSL, only NBN plans are cheaper. So customers were paying less, but what they were paying paid for the NBN construction. Because instead of their money flowing to telsteaTelstra, a company with more than $4bn in profit annually, it was paying for the NBN construction. Sounds like a pretty reasonable plan, right?

      Byt the changes that Malcolm and the LNP have made have taken it from a $44.3bn construction that was paid for with investment dollars and not on the budget, to an up to $56bn project that can’t turn a profit, (because it has lower market share and no high margin products to sell) so that is up to $56bn cost to the budget and to you and I and every other tax payer. *That* is $56bn that could have been used for something else. $56bn wasted, that you can put directly at the feet of Prime Minister Malcolm ‘Political Vandal’ Turnbull and the LNP.

      • UninvitedGuest,

        Does it make your blood boil that tens of billions is being pumped into a project you had no say in?

        So the 2013 election didn’t happen?

        Because the original plan for the NBN would have cost you and I and every other tax payer

        Rubbish.

        Because it was funded by investment,

        No it wasn’t, it never reached that stage.

        because it was returning a positive cash flow

        No it wasn’t, it never reached that stage.

        – a profit to the investors.

        There was no profit to investors, because the rollout never finished.

        The Labor NBN funding plan was similar to the Coalition MtM funding plan, Government funding for the initial rollout period then third party sourced investment later.

        • There was no profit to investors, because the rollout never finished.

          Which was, after all, UG’s point.

          The Labor NBN funding plan was similar to the Coalition MtM funding plan, Government funding for the initial rollout period then third party sourced investment later.

          Similar, but not the same. The LPA “plan” has a much lower ARPU thanks to FttN not allowing most to get the top tier, which of course impacts their revenue (and their ability to source funding as we’ve recently seen):

          http://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/Committees/ec_ctte/estimates/bud_1516/communications/q118.pdf

        • Reality… You realise you are kind of agreeing with UG right?

          It never reached that stage = Because the Coalition changed from a workable funded by investment plan, to an unworkable mess, that doesn’t make sense?

          • Indeed woolfe; strangely enough very similar actions in say the USA and the home loan/sub prime market caused this little thing called the GFC.

            I’m glad to see the MTM is doing so well though and not suffering the same fate (*whole lot of sarcasm etc*).

  16. So where is the investigation into the leak of the ALPs NBN policy by the AFP?

    Oh that’s right we know how that happened the LNP ordered the AFP to raid the ALP to get it for Murdock!

    Yes i know they are not known as the LNP nationally but i can’t get myself to call this mob of right wing extremist incompetents as liberals that hypocrisy is way too much for me.

  17. The Press Council are nothing but Murdoch rag peddlers who condone their intentional fraud reporting.

    • I don’t agree. The Press Council finds against News Corpse so often they have considered pulling out of it.

  18. i see murdoch is involved in the nbn now but i assure you he will not get his hands onit ever not this criminal

Comments are closed.