Fact check: Turnbull misleads Q&A audience on NBN

271

news Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull appears to have misled the ABC’s Q&A program about key facts regarding the National Broadband Network project, repeating a set of common misconceptions about the initiative in response to a question on air last night.

On the ABC’s Q&A program last night (we recommend you click here for the full show), an audience member asked Turnbull the following question: “Prime Minister, the NBN your Government has implemented, while being cheaper, is proven to be outdated and much slower than the Labor Government’s NBN scheme.”

“Countries like the UK, New Zealand and Germany are already replacing these parts of their networks with fibre to the premises instead. How will you ensure the NBN will be future proofed so taxpayers do not end up paying twice to rebuild the NBN infrastructure, much like the UK is now?”

The question was followed with applause from the audience.

In response, Turnbull made a number of statements about the NBN project which appear to reflect similar comments the Prime Minister and other senior Coalition figures have made about the project over the past several years. Both Christopher Pyne and Barnaby Joyce have made similar statements on Q&A over the past several weeks.

Turnbull’s central argument was that the NBN project had “completely failed” under the previous Rudd/Gillard Labor administration.

“It had ground to a halt in many parts of Australia,” the Prime Minister said. “They had succeeded in connecting to the NBN a little over 50,000 premises. We connected more than 60,000 last month. The project was was a complete failure.”

Turnbull said the Coalition had turned the NBN project around. “There are now 2.6 million premises in Australia where you can get the NBN,” the Prime Minister said. “There are well over a million premises that have got it.”

Turnbull also took aim at those who claimed they required higher speeds on the NBN.

“Of the 1,050,000 –roughly- customers on the NBN, about 13 percent are ordering the 100 megabyte per second product. About 84 percent are ordering 25Mbps or less,” the Prime Minister said, adding that only 2 percent of NBN fixed wireless customers were ordering the highest speed 50Mbps offering on that technology.

The reality, Turnbull said, was that the NBN under the Coalition was meeting the demad of its customers.

“We’re rolling it out, we’re rolling it out literally six to eight years sooner and $30 billion cheaper than would have been the case under Labor’s plan,” he said.

“Now there’s a quarter of Australian households and businesses, premises that can get it now. In two years it will be three quarters and by 2019/20, it will be finished. That’s what we have done, we have taken this failed project and we’re delivering it and we’re delivering it quickly and at lower cost.”

However, there is clear evidence that a number of Turnbull’s statements are inaccurate or strongly contested; or that the Prime Minister left important context out of his statements.

For example, Turnbull’s statements with respect to the NBN’s progress neglected to include the fact that the NBN project was always planned to ‘ramp up’ as the years went on.

It’s true that the NBN had been delayed under Labor, due primarily to difficulties with the contracting model and unexpected issues with asbestos in Telstra’s ducting infrastructure.

However, in addition, several years of detailed planning and contract negotiations needed to be undertaken before the NBN company could begin deploying the NBN at a national scale.

Almost all of the rollout progress which the NBN has made under the Coalition has been using Labor’s initial Fibre to the Premises technology, courtesy of the fact that that planning work had already been undertaken before the Coalition came into power in September 2013. The successful launch of the NBN company’s satellite earlier this year can also be chalked up to Labor.

In comparison, the NBN company has made relatively little progress in deploying the rival technologies — Fibre to the Node and HFC cable — which the Coalition has imposed on the project. Its HFC cable rollout especially has only recently begun.

Turnbull’s comments regarding NBN speeds are also highly contested.

The Coalition and the NBN company itself (during the time that it has been under Coalition managment) have repeatedly stated that Australians did not want or need the gigabit speeds which FTTP can deliver, citing as evidence the fact that most NBN customers so far have taken up only slower speeds such as 12Mbps and 25Mbps.

However, technology figures such as Atlassian co-founder Mike Cannon-Brookes — one of Australia’s most successful technology entrepreneurs — and others have stated in public that gigabit speeds are essential for the nation’s long-term development. In addition, internationally telcos such as AT&T, Google, Verizon and more are talking up the need for such speeds.

Locally, the slow take-up of high-end NBN services has been linked to the company’s pricing structure, with figures such as Stephen Baxter — celebrated entrepreneur and co-founder of fibre telco PIPE Networks — stating their disbelief that the NBN company charged customers more for accessing higher speeds, rather than incentivising them to use the full capacity of the NBN network.

In short, many experts believe Australians would take up the higher NBN speeds in much greater numbers if the NBN company reworked its much-criticised wholesale pricing model.

Turnbull’s comments regarding Labor’s original FTTP plan costing $30 billion more and taking six to eight years longer are based on a so-called “counterfactual” which the NBN company produced at Turnbull’s behest, in an attempt to criticise the idea of returning to Labor’s FTTP model.

However, the figures are strongly disputed, with the NBN company itself having produced a separate set of estimates in its 2013 Strategic Review showing that a reworked version of Labor’s FTTP model could be delivered by 2023, and that it would, as the Coalition’s MTM model would, make a return on the Government’s investment — an eventual profit.

Turnbull also didn’t address the fact that the MTM model being implemented by the Coalition in the NBN project has significant long-term drawbacks.

It will leave up to two thirds of Australians stranded on legacy HFC cable and copper infrastructure that many believe will need to upgraded again within the next decade, in order to keep up with rapidly increasing bandwidth demands on fixed-line telecommunications networks.

The cost of these upgrades has not been factored into the Coalition’s NBN policy.

Turnbull’s comments also did not address Labor’s new NBN policy. Launched last week, the policy adopted some aspects of the Coalition’s model, such as its focus on HFC cable technology, but would also see the Fibre to the Node aspect of the Coalition’s policy dumped in favour of a return to the original FTTP model.

The Coalition has given a number of indications that it will not revise its NBN policy for this year’s Federal Election, choosing instead to focus on fixing mobile blackspots around the nation.

opinion/analysis
On last night’s episode of Q&A, Turnbull did nothing to address persistent criticism of the Coalition’s NBN policy. Neither did he address — at all — Labor’s reworked NBN vision.

Instead, what we got was a repeat of the standardised set of talking points which virtually every Coalition MP has been parroting about the NBN for the past two to three years.

I find this insulting, to say the least.

Turnbull is clearly aware that the NBN debate has moved on and that the country is now having a nuanced discussion of how the NBN project should proceed over the next decade, incorporating technologies such as HFC cable, FTTP and perhaps even new models such as Fibre to the Distribution Point.

The Prime Minister’s failure to address that debate in any way, shape of form shows his lack of respect for the public; and also his determination not to meaningfully engage on the matter of the NBN. The increasingly likelihood that the Coalition will not refine its NBN policy for the election reinforces that impression.

Image credit: Screenshot of the ABC’s Q&A program, believed to be covered under fair dealing

271 COMMENTS

  1. my fave part was when he said tony jones works for the labor party. no cuts to the abc before the last election that was a fun one

    • That’s what you do when the facts inconveniently disagree with your position – accuse the questioner of bias or a witch-hunt to make their question (and hopefully the inconvenient facts) seem unreasonable and thus avoidable.

  2. Turnbull so deep in the Liberal NBN lie he can’t turn back now.
    Keep soldering on over the cliff Turnbull!

    • Why did the % on 100Mbps decline from 19% to 16% in 2015?
      Why are 79% on 25Mbps or slower?
      Is <1% on 1Gbps in 2026 acceptable?

      Would Liberal FTTN without speed tiers be faster than Labor FTTP with speed tiers for most Australians?

      • Lol Mathew would it be when they use figures for FTTB for FTTN.

        They don’t even test the copper unless you pay $250 for a home install

      • New Zealand 2012 so little 100mbps it didn’t register on the stats.
        New Zealand 2013 100mpbs users up 10%
        New Zealand 2014 100mbps users at 20%
        New Zealand 2015 100mbps users at around 30%

        Europe 100mbps take-up rate around 10% annually.

        Grasp those tiny straws Mathew, they are slipping!

        • Several 3rd world countries in Africa aiming for base 1Gbps rollouts or Estonia leaving the stone age behind and deploying 10Gbps!

          Local Adelaide councils and state politicians are considering a 10Gbps rollout even (trying to be an ‘innovative state’)!

          Poor Mathew.

      • Would Liberal FTTN without speed tiers be faster than Labor FTTP with speed tiers for most Australians?

        Probably in the short term, but not in 5-10 years time.

        The FttN system is physically (as in science physics) unable to match FttP, so once the prices drop, those on FttN would be the ones getting (comparably) slower and slower.

        • The FttN system is physically (as in science physics) unable to match FttP, so once the prices drop, those on FttN would be the ones getting (comparably) slower and slower.

          Nailed it.

        • You still are reluctant to explain why NBN FTTP 100Mbps users are declining in Australia?

          • Are you reluctant to explain while 15% of FTTP are on 100Mbps why and 14% of FTTB on 100Mbps but only 7% on 100Mbps for FTTN.

          • You still are reluctant to explain why NBN FTTP 100Mbps users are declining in Australia?

            Got a link for that claim?

            Since FttN came out, only 7.44% are getting (and I quote) “25-100/5-40 Mbps” on it, FttN is dragging the whole average down.

          • Are you still reluctant to explain why the rest of the world is going FTTP, but we are not?

          • And alain, you are reluctant to address the topic of the PM misleading, so…

            GO

            Apology accepted.

        • Would Liberal FTTN without speed tiers be faster than Labor FTTP with speed tiers for most Australians?

          Is that clutching at straws, arguing the strawman or all of the above straw related desperation?

          NEWSFLASH: it’s a moot point considering the slow shitty MTM network and the superior FTTP network both would/will/ do have speed tiers.

          This is simply another tainted, ideological, WTF moment from someone who we thought couldn’t get any more WTF, IMO.

      • “Is <1% on 1Gbps in 2026 acceptable?"
        With FTTP this is possible. With FTTN and other intermediate networks (HFC, FTTB, Satellite, Wireless) it isn't. Pulling Wabbits out of hats should be a trick for magicians Matt, not random Keyboard Justice League members such as yourself.

        "Why are 79% on 25Mbps or slower?"
        Again this is a pointless argument. There are literally hundreds of reasons why; so picking one out of a hat and proclaiming that's the main reason is like saying because I can't see past the horizon means the world is flat. I mean it could be that the public doesn't understand the benefit to more then 25Mbps because of the Australian mentality of "She'll Be Alright, mate". It could be that the price is perfect for those that want it, it could be that their ISP only told them about that plan and they didn't research. It could be that they chose 25Mbps plan to test out the NBN network, and when there contracts expire they will go for higher speeds because with ADSL2+ they were disenfranchised. TAKE YOUR PICK

        "Why did the % on 100Mbps decline from 19% to 16% in 2015?"
        …..If your argument starts with such a stupid point as this, your not intelligent enough to even start putting input into this argument. I mean I'm sure in your eyes it has nothing to do with the fact that MORE PEOPLE WERE BEING PUT ON THE NETWORK ROLL-OUT meaning that the percentage of user's on 100Mbps would be reflected as a percentage of the people hooked into the NBN. So of course, over the build time this number is going to fluctuate up and down with the number of residents on NBN going up.

        "Would Liberal FTTN without speed tiers be faster than Labor FTTP with speed tiers for most Australians?"
        Unless somehow Speed Tiers are holding the laws of Physics in play and if you remove it then Physics goes all wibbly wobbly then that's debunked. I mean if FTTN is faster then FTTP then why in the hell is everyone moving away from FTTN to FTTP, I'm guessing again it can't be because Light signals from Fibre are faster then Electricial signals from Copper…. No speed tiers don't work in regards to number of people connected either, as that would put the onus on ISP's anyways and it would actually be more expensive. It would be a matter of ISP"s needing an infrastructure that can handle high speeds with high customer takeup. There is no magical "Digital CandyLand" my friend were numbers don't matter and 1000 people can fap to porn at 1Gps as that would mean an ISP would first need to A) Build a backhaul that could support 1000Gbps speeds WITHOUT impacting plan pricing. B) Somehow defy the laws of Electra-conductivity, Physics and Networking rules to get speeds of 1Gbps down -500m of Copper.

        If you can show me ANY test where they have gotten UNLIMITED speeds via copper down ATLEAST 500M of copper, then my legs will go wibbly wobbly and bow down to my master

        • > Again this is a pointless argument. There are literally hundreds of reasons why; so picking one out of a hat and proclaiming that’s the main reason

          No need to pick a reason out of the hat. This image from Labor’s NBNCo Corporate Plan shows why Labor expected most to connect at slow speeds.
          https://twitter.com/NBNBenefits/status/745110545527803905

          > Unless somehow Speed Tiers are holding the laws of Physics in play

          Correct. If I drive a V8 super car with pit lane speed limiter on will it be slower or faster than the standard model?

          > Somehow defy the laws of Electra-conductivity, Physics and Networking rules to get speeds of 1Gbps down -500m of Copper.

          Can you order a 1Gbps plan today? No!
          Are you in the top 1%? If yes, then FoD cost is cheap. If no, then you aren’t getting 1Gbps under Labor.

          For the 84% connecting at 25Mbps or slower removing the speed tiers will provide a speed boost. Simon Hackett at Internode proved this in 2005 when he introduced ADSL2+ without speed tiers.

          • Are you in the top 1%? If yes, then FoD cost is cheap.

            Why do you keep persisting with this lie Mathew? If you’re on FttN, you can not get FoD.

          • So Mathew, at the same point in the graph you use, nearly 50% of people are one 100Mb or faster. Seems to me the extra speed over FTTN (which is usually less than 100Mb) is required.
            If you buy a new car, do you buy one that can’t do 100kph because you won’t be using a freeway for a while because the next model up can do 200kph and you don’t need that sort of speed?

          • “If no, then you aren’t getting 1Gbps under Labor.”
            Probably because Labor haven’t been busy demolishing the network over the past 3 years.

          • Another Tinman_au own goal.

            The own goal is your own, you should have clicked on the “Apply” link:

            Currently applications are only accepted from applicants who are originally planned to receive fixed wireless or satellite technologies and wish to switch to fibre technology.

            I’ve been posting that for a few weeks now, but you obviously have some sort of cognitive blindness issue.

            Your welcome.

          • The Green Tick means ‘available now’.

            When I entered FTTN to FTTP as the upgrade choice it said.

            To apply for FTTN to FTTP upgrade, you will need to currently have a FTTN infrastructure built in your premises. Applications will be accepted from areas and premises that are in ‘Ready for Service’ stage of the FTTN network.

            Not what you posted.

          • “This image from Labor’s NBNCo Corporate Plan shows why Labor expected most to connect at slow speeds.”

            You made milk come out of my nose with that…
            You are like a carnival act, constantly trying to read something into this weeks breakdown of plans like they were tea leaves in a fortune teller’s tent. It really is ridiculous Mathew…

          • @ alain

            When I entered FTTN to FTTP as the upgrade choice it said…

            “To apply for FTTN to FTTP upgrade, you will need to currently have a FTTN infrastructure built in your premises.”

            Pity then, you swallowed the “for all by 2016” lie, because we won’t “all” have FTTN, until 2020 (if your heroes win the upcoming election and the MTM/FTTN lie isn’t revised again) … so FoD is a moot point for many for years.

            Feel free to now address the topic of more lies.

            You’re welcome.

          • @Mathew

            Even if speed tiers were removed or in 5 years time prices go down and more people take up higher tiers.

            FTTP network will be able to provide 1 or 10 Gbps to all their customers at peak use.

            For FTTN network to achieve the same, all the customers will need to upgrade their link to the node. Even then, the node’s link to the exchange will struggle at those demands unless upgraded or adjusted (if they already use DWDM).

          • @ Matt
            “No need to pick a reason out of the hat. This image from Labor’s NBNCo Corporate Plan shows why Labor expected most to connect at slow speeds.
            https://twitter.com/NBNBenefits/status/745110545527803905

            Why do you keep on saying Labor when Coalition has also not done anything about this so by default also supports this. So correction, The Government’s expectation was to connect everyone at slower speeds.
            Also again, grasping at straws and assuming SPECIFIC data points support your theory. For example, your graph points to the fact that Wireless leakage is because NBN is too expensive, what data supports this percentage? this number made up? Where did this 13 percent come from? Does this data represent customer’s thoughts that its to expensive in the past, present or future? Does this data also reflect prices going down in the future or prices stagnating for 10 years or so? Soooo many unanswered questions….
            Also this data CANNOT represent future uptake values as they can only be projected and can change over time. The future is uncertain.

            “Correct. If I drive a V8 super car with pit lane speed limiter on will it be slower or faster than the standard model?”

            Makes no sense. If there were no speed tiers, your only as slow as everybody else. The more people on the network, the slower the link. Unless what your saying is that an ISP will create a back haul link that assumes that everybody can connect at 1Gbps and NOT pass this cost to the customer? My point is, that you cannot get infinite speed from a copper cable without breaking the laws of physics, regardless of speed tiers being implemented or not.

            “Can you order a 1Gbps plan today? No!
            Are you in the top 1%? If yes, then FoD cost is cheap. If no, then you aren’t getting 1Gbps under Labor.”

            Irrelevant, show me a retain plan that offers 1Gbps and ill take it. You cannot connect to a service that no one is offering, so your point is ignored. Again, show me some evidence that supports your claims that actually make sense, not some “Gotcha” MS paint BS. Also as a footnote, no I won’t be getting 1Gbps under labor because LABOR ISN’T EVEN THE RULING GOVERNMENT SO DOESN’T HAVE THE POWER TO MAKE SAID DECISION.

            “For the 84% connecting at 25Mbps or slower removing the speed tiers will provide a speed boost. Simon Hackett at Internode proved this in 2005 when he introduced ADSL2+ without speed tiers.”

            Again, a moot point. So can you show me evidence that Internode customers in 2005 were getting speeds above ADSL2+ spec of 24Mbps consistently? Because that’s my argument. If your max speed that you can get on your line is below or even 25Mbps then your going to choose that speed tier and your going to find that even without a speed tier, there isn’t a way that you can get any higher.
            Case in point, EVERYBODY WHO HAD ADSL2+ WITHOUT SPEED TIERS THAT HASN’T REACHED 24MBPS MAX SPEED WITHIN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS. Feel free to google that for evidence

            Also again, please feel free to provide evidence that the Liberal/Coalition led FTTN policy can provide 1Gbps to most Australian homes as an alternative to your “Labor’s plan is <1% on 1Gbps by 2026" Parrot argument

      • For crying out loud Mathew, find another drum to bang. As I said to you on Twitter, it’s not about now, it’s about the next 50+ years.

        Soth pretty much summed that up as well I think.

          • If the MTM continues then not many more would have the ability to get 1Gbps. If Labor can roll out a lot more fibre then in 10 years I imagine your comment would be invalid :)

            If the current number that can get 1Gbps haven’t moved above 1% in 10 years I would be very surprised. Build it and they will come. Not very scientific I know but I’m guessing it’s still a reality more times than not :)

          • To answer your strawman. Yes, I would prefer to spend 100 billion dollars on a network that only the 1% can afford, than spend 46 billion dollars on a network that no one wants to pay for.

            Luckily, the comparison is between a 46 billion dollar network no one can afford gigabit on, vs a 56 billion dollar network no one can buy gigabit on.

            I know which one I want.

          • PeterA,

            I would prefer to spend 100 billion dollars on a network that only the 1% can afford,

            Except you are not spending it.

            Luckily, the comparison is between a 46 billion dollar network no one can afford gigabit on

            What $46B network?

            , vs a 56 billion dollar network no one can buy gigabit on.

            What $56B network?

          • Why is the market share for small TVs shrinking while the market for large TVs is growing. When all is said and done, the programs are the same. http://goo.gl/NDrGpL

            It’s always been about people’s perception of values. With more people on higher speed plans, more services will emerge. Just like smart phone apps have done. It was not long ago when there wwere none of these.

          • “So in 10 years time when <1% have 1Gbps you will consider this acceptable?"

            I see, you want a professional analysis of the future?

            "we forecast about 600 million subscribers may be on networks that offer a Gigabit tariff as of 2020, representing the majority of connected homes in the world. At this stage between 50 and 100 million broadband connections may be Gbit/s, or marketed as such. This would be between 5 and 10 percent of all broadband connections. Of these about 90 percent would be residential, and the remainder for business."

            http://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/technology-media-and-telecommunications/articles/tmt-pred16-telecomm-dawn-of-the-gigabit-internet-age.html#full-report

          • Jesus Mathew, it’s not just about speed either. New fiber cabling runs have a lifetime rating of about 70-100 years, while existing copper will need to be replaced many times before this is up.

            Stop beating a dead horse…

          • “What $46B network?
            What $56B network?”
            Two network rollout plans, figures for both been discussed for 3 years. Get with the program.

            How embarrassing for you, Alain.

      • “Why did the % on 100Mbps decline from 19% to 16% in 2015?” — do you even need to ask this question? Really?

        If you cant understand that anybody connected under FttB, FttN, or HFC doesnt have 100/40 as an option, then you’re not going to understand any rational answer.

        • Considering that 14% and falling are connected at 100Mbps is that a big deal? If you are so special that you need 100Mbps pay for fibre to be installed or move.

          Alternatively if you think everyone should have 100Mbps as a minimum argue that position.

          • I dont need to pay to get FttP where I live, its already here.

            I’m pointing out that if the pool of people is growing, and the most recent premises entering the pool arent capable of getting FttP, then automatically the number of people connecting to 100/40 is going to drop.

            If there are 1 million people capable of FttP, and 500 thousand capable of… lets go with ‘less’, then a maximum of 66.6% can connect to 100/40. If the next 500,000 are still in that ‘next’ category, then the maximum amount of people that can connect drops to 50%.

            Thats not a reduction in numbers, its a lowering of proportion. A lowering due to the new entries fundamentally being incapable of being part of that stat.

            Didnt think you’d understand the answer.

            Personally, I’d like everyone to have a minimum access to 100 Mbps, and have those larger 1 Gbps or 10 Gbps capabilities sitting on the shelf if/when they are needed. We will need 100/40, to think otherwise borders on insanity given the incredibly consistent growth rate of the past 25 years.

            To not have 100/40 in the 21st century is an immediate handicap on the global market. You immediately tell the rest of the world that we’re not a place to invest in. Go to New Zealand instead.

          • “Considering that 14% and falling are connected at 100Mbps is that a big deal?”

            Considering that “600 million subscribers may be on networks that offer a Gigabit tariff as of 2020”, it really doesn’t matter.

          • Matthew:
            The question is not “what’s the percentage of people who have signed up for 100mbps”
            The question is “what’s the percentage of people who ACTUALLY HAVE THE OPTION of 100mbps available who have signed up for 100mbps”

            You can’t just include the people who literally can’t get 100mbps even if they want it in the statistics of who is choosing or not choosing 100mbps.

          • Does he actually though? If he does, he’s choosing to pretend he doesn’t. Something I’ve seen happen with him at pretty much every opportunity.

          • If he does, he’s choosing to pretend he doesn’t. Something I’ve seen happen with him at pretty much every opportunity.

            I see you’re finally understanding where he’s really coming from :o)

      • Irrelevant; as the original forecast was 50% on 25 or faster, and that turned out to be 65% and on the rise. The higher end plans provide more revenue, so this percentage being higher than forecast renders your point meaningless.

      • Mathew,
        We are aware of those figures and projections and you and I agree that NBN pricing badly needs to be reworked, but why do you continue to use those figures to make a point of lack of demand when the higher speeds are just too expensive for most people?

        I think having a Ferrari would be cool. A lot of people want a Ferrari. But very few of them are sold. Have a guess why. The answer is the reason why making points based on NBN speed take-up figures is folly.

        • “The answer is the reason why making points based on NBN speed take-up figures is folly.”

          Currently, making points based on take up figures is folly mainly because the network is not yet complete. The majority of the connections are currently in low-density population rural and small regional towns.

          When the network is deployed in higher density population cities, in two years time at least, you watch those take up figures jump, especially the higher speed tiers as residential customers feast on Triple Play and innovative commercial customers consume higher bandwidths to take advantage of the latest applications to serve their customers.

      • If clients are on copper their maximum speed will be 25 Mbps, so of course they will ask for what is their maximum. If there were higher options there would be a point to that argument?

      • WTF has your standard, cherry-picked, gibberish got to do with the topic of Turnbull misleading @ Q&A…

        Oh that’s right.

        Really showing those true colours now Mathew, good boy.

        Don’t forget 50/12.

        You’re welcome.

      • If it is anything like what I experienced:

        I purchased 100/40 NBN
        The *best* I ever achieved was 30/25 – on average a lot less.

        If I hadn’t have moved premises then I would also have downgraded – no point paying a premium for what you don’t get.

          • Nah Tinman, couldn’t be their skimping on a cheap RSP, must be Labor’s NBN! Because the Liberal Party said so.

          • It’s seems pretty random when I’ve asked, sometimes it’s a “good” RSP (i.e. Telstra), and sometimes it’s a “budget” RSP (i.e. TPG).

            Seeing as NBNCo don’t like sharing this type of info, asking folks is about the only way to get a feel for it.

      • @Mathew (21/06/2016 at 12:10 pm)
        “Why did the % on 100Mbps decline from 19% to 16% in 2015?
        Why are 79% on 25Mbps or slower?”
        Please refer to my end note ‘My Points’

        “Is <1% on 1Gbps in 2026 acceptable?"
        It is too early to state < 1% when 1Gbps is not available to the public at this time.
        Also, FTTN does not even come close to providing this at its current state.

        "Would Liberal FTTN without speed tiers be faster than Labor FTTP with speed tiers for most Australians?"
        Fact is FTTN has speed tiers just as FTTP, the coalition has not mentioned any plans to change this as far as I know.

        @Reality (21/06/2016 at 4:51 pm)
        "You still are reluctant to explain why NBN FTTP 100Mbps users are declining in Australia?"
        Please refer to my end note 'My Points'

        Source:
        https://www.accc.gov.au/regulated-infrastructure/communications/national-broadband-network-nbn/nbn-wholesale-market-indicators-report/initial-report

        The Data:
        https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/NBN%20wholesale%20report.xlsx

        My Points:
        http://prntscr.com/bjdgx8

      • the reality is once again “build it and they will come”

        people migrating from adsl1 accounts will not automatically go for the higher speeds or quotas. however once they have access to high speed streams, HD quality, and reliable connections, they will begin to subscribe to services that require those things, as they couldn’t access them before.

        this is simply human behaviour, this doesnt take into account where technology is heading.

        we now have a government which has castrated a project which we have been in DIRE need of since the telstra sell off crippled the progress of this type of infastructure, and guess who did it.

        we are now expected to accept a gutted project, at a far inflated price, using retired sections of network that were deemed below acceptable standard.

        people think the country would stop without trucks, so we obviously need roads. the country would absolutely stop without telecommunications. we need modern, high capacity reliable infrastructure, and we need redundancy. using the parts that could provide redundancy as the backbone, when they are 40 year old at times retired technology, is insane.

        • >the reality is once again “build it and they will come”

          They?

          Software application requirements, due to rapid development and innovation, will always outstrip hardware which includes telecommunications networks as well as computer hardware!

          US Ignite: Developing Gigabit-ready digital experiences and applications.

          https://www.us-ignite.org/

      • Mathew continues his saga. Caught with his dick shoved into the mouth of a dead pig!

        Perhaps he shouldn’t go around waving it at others. The pig is infatuated with Mathew. It will soon get jealous and it will turn around and hump him!

      • If we do it will be a fairly historic thing as the incumbents rarely lose after a single term here :/

        At least they don’t look to be getting both houses as we all saw what Johnny H got up to with both houses and it wasn’t pretty.

      • Back in 2005 I told myself it was totally pointless to be tied to the mast of a sinking ship!

  3. “The question was followed with applause from the audience.”

    The answer was followed by NO applause from the audience.

  4. ““It had ground to a halt in many parts of Australia,”

    It only “ground to a halt” in my area post election w/ a delay of 1 to 2 years because our great leader put a stop work to “renegotiate contracts” and then left all other areas in HFC limbo even as they were slated to have FTTP roll outs next..

    Yup that’s a good one Mr Turnbull!

    • Yeah, love that one. Abbott gets into power, says to NBN “stop everything you havent already started” then crows that they “corrected” this “grinding to a halt” scenario.

      Love it.

  5. Deceptions and bipartisanship aside, he completely dodges the true point of the question.

    While the NBN might be meeting some current customer needs now (albeit based on what they are currently prepared to pay based on what they’ll get), it completely ignores the future. This is an infrastructure project. Infrastructure is expected to be future proof or be viable for decades to come.

    While there may be a DOCSIS technology path forward for the HFC network, it will still need re-segmenting, which is a labour intensive effort and requires additional infrastructure in at the street level.

    The FTTN is worse as this is limited by the waterlogged copper and joints from the house to the node down the street. There are going to be a huge number of those nodes. To increase capacity they will require upgrading, possibly with additional fibre pulled back to the exchange as they’re only putting 2 fibres in. Additionally there is the maintenance and limitations of the copper network (which was one of the initial drivers of the project). Majority of service issues that individuals experience is due to that copper. It was the pole-to-pole joints when I was a kid in the suburbs or Melbourne. It has been the source of more than 5 outages here in the suburban geographic centre of Melbourne for me in the past decade. (The pairs in the street are water logged and corroded. They break every time they touch them – e.g. when repairing someone elses service. They have replaced an entire side street length of all the copper between the exchange and the pillar a year ago. It took 6-10 guys 4 days working 12+ hour shifts.

    A smarter way forward would be FTTdp to get the fibre to the pole or pit outside the house, but the NBN is too politically invested FTTN as a matter of face saving.

    The biggest laugh of all is in new areas that had the foresight to lay fibre in the all the streets. e.g. near Point Cook in Melbourne. They’re not allowed to use the fibre because of the NBN deals that were done, hence the people in those areas are left to use 3G/4G cell modems.

      • Actually its not even that (LPA is the only ones buying copper networks globally it would seem) otherwise they’d be able to find someone to lend them the rest of the money …. its a bit sad when all the loan sharks/bankers in the world decide your national infrastructure project is a lost cause.

          • “Some believe this was the plan all along” — all we know is, he’s called The Stig!

            Could Tony Abbott be The Stig?

          • @HC I doubt T$ would buy it all.

            The fibre parts sure and with the FW/Sat they could probably do another Optus.

            Anyone that buys any of the copper though is locking them into rather large maintenance bills and nobody in the world is doing that anymore. Basically if its sold for more than scrap value I don’t see anyone buying it (also consider that the same $ invested in mobile tech will more than double said companies returns too).

          • I doubt T$ would buy it all.

            I doubt the ACCC would let them buy much of it at all, it’d be a massive breach of everything it was created for.

      • But who would want to buy a second hand copper network that’s past its expiration date?
        Even if they just wanted to melt down the copper as scrap, the labour cost of physically pulling it out would exceed the return. Especialy considering the cheap 0.40mm grade being used.

  6. It’s really infuriating to see people that don’t understand the NBN situation! Can someone tell me exactly why we need the 1gbps speeds? That’s just Greed! I have 100kbps, and I can cope just fine. Sure, I have to wait a few minutes to be able to watch a movie, but what’s wrong with patience? The question received no applause, and Turnbull responded to the question. Of course, he took a while to get to the point, but when you’ve got an audience that doesn’t understand the topic, you do have to contextualise. 10mbps would be a miracle for me, let alone the 20mbps they’re offering. 50mbps is just a waste of money. Under Labor, I would never have received the NBN, but I will have it by the end of this year (thank god). When I see people that have speeds in excess of 1mbps complaining about their internet, I just think, what on Earth has this country come to? This generation wants everything for nothing and everything now!

    • Talk about FUD with extra’s.
      Selfish/greedy people are the ones who is keeping back our digital economy to the rest of the world.

    • Why higher speeds? For future service delivery:
      * Telehealth
      * supporting in-home care for health and the ageing
      * education
      * business

      Why did we need to go faster than a horse could run? Why do we need cars? Societies got along well without them, but not now society is structured around the faster speeds available from a car. Same for digital. It’s barely beginning. Australia is building a goat track, unfortunately.

      • I’d think the “100kbps” would say “yes”, unless he’s still using a dialup modem?

          • Imagine if we had stuck with dialup the kinds of speeds we would be experiencing today!

            And for no new infrastructure investment!!

            I mean it was 1984 when they released the 9.6k modem.
            It doubled after 9 years with the 19.2k in 1993
            it roughly doubled again after 5 years with 56.6 in 1998.

            I estimate that 3 years later in 2001 we would have increased dialup to 100kbits per second!

            In fact, according to my research, by 2002 advancements in Dialup speeds would be so fast, we would be doubling speed every 3 days and achieving transfers rates in excess of 30 megabits per second!!

    • A polished performance….. Drama, uncertainty, pathos ….even shock and anger. Unsurpassed emotional range. Your audience awaits the next gem.

    • Considering the Coalition made the last election all about the critical need to save money at the expense of everything/anything else, maybe you should be a little concerned that the current government lied it’s way to power & then sold you an NBN that will need upgrading in 5-10 years, for 2/3rds of the cost of a future proof 50-100 year life-cycle NBN, with 100Mbits now & an easy upgrade path to 1Gbit & beyond when it’s eventually required.

    • The applause for the question is at 38 seconds into https://www.facebook.com/abcqanda/videos/10153496748041831/

      It is probably a huge surprise for you to learn that broadband policy should not and does not concern itself with your communication requirements alone. There are 24 million other people and at least two of them would not be satisfied with 100kbps. Especially for the next 50 years. The real issue is if you get a basic service for $50billion, and a far superior service with a longer expected life for a small increase on that, why would you settle for the lower solution? We could be 60th in the Olympics if we spend much less on elite athletes. Is that likely to find favour?

    • Ok. You are mixing arguments.
      The first question is whether the government should do it as infrastructure.
      Based on the state of the industry and the various failed attempts by both sides to get private industry to ante up. The government felt it necessary to do.

      Now that decision was made the next one is do you reuse existing infrastructure that is near to end of life, and would need to be purchased from private industry to build a network that gives you what you require now, at a lower build cost but higher operating cost. Or do you build something that is modern, already meets the demand for now, allows for future growth at minimal upgrade cost, does cost more to build, but has lower operating cost.

      So do you build for now, or for the future?

    • > It’s really infuriating to see people that don’t understand the NBN situation! Can someone tell me exactly why we need the 1gbps speeds?

      To deliver the benefits that Labor promised. Labor prepared a nice graphic showing the demands of eHealth & eLearning.
      You can look at it here: https://twitter.com/NBNBenefits/status/744067036385517568

      > That’s just Greed!

      Worse than that it is delusional selfishness.

      Labor’s plan is for less than 1% to have 1Gbps in 2026. Anyone in that 1% could easily afford fibre on demand install even if it was $20,000 (half that after tax).

    • “I have 100kbps, and I can cope just fine.”
      “My needs are the only needs that need be met; everyone else is below me”

      “Sure, I have to wait a few minutes to be able to watch a movie, but what’s wrong with patience?”
      At 100kbps, the average SD movie takes you 90 hours to download.

      You’re clueless.

      “Under Labor, I would never have received the NBN”
      Do you count as one of the 0% that lives in the nation?
      Moreover, do you count as one of the 0% who have received the Liberals’ promise of network completion in 2016?

      “I just think, what on Earth has this country come to? This generation wants everything for nothing and everything now!”
      It’s almost as if they don’t live in the 1950s!

    • Most developed countries are greedy, then, because 1+Gbps is coming to them in just the next 4 years. On 12 to 25Mbps, Australia will certainly be the odd one out.

      • In four years time the United States would have retired the old outdated telephone networks already with the FCC’s blessing.

        Gigabit broadband is available in many places now from many providers, including my residence & business premises in San Francisco.

        In 2010 Chattanooga was the first gigabit city in the U.S. came into being which transformed the city into an innovation hub.

        EPB recently upgraded the network to 10Gbps. Why would they do that? LoL

        http://chattanoogagig.com/

        It saddens me that Australian thinking and innovation is 16 years behind.

    • And this is why we are in this predicament with people like this being so narrow minded !!! It’s not the fact that I can stream HD netflicks without it buffering. It’s about small business inovation. I’ll give you an exsample I used to work for an engineering company in Perth who also had a drafting office in Vietnam. We would mark up drawings and scan them in and then email them to Vietnam. Problem was the Internet connection was so poor out end that it would take 5 hours to up load them. Because Vietnam has high speed internet they would have them downloaded in seconds drawn up and sent back we would then have to wait to download them again. It was so bad that some projects we would go to another office with high speed internet or SEND A USB IN THE MAIL!!!! THE MAIL!!!!!!!!!

      • SMH had an article and he was living in FttN area working in FttP and he’d walk the 20 min round trip to work with USB to DL something (talking 10’s-100’s GB) and walk back (and it still wouldn’t be done at his home address).

        At work currently we struggle to back up stuff as our uploads are so constrained. We can only have 1 person working from home at a time because otherwise everyone fighting over BW.

    • James I worked on the NBN project for four years. I do understand the situation. Copper has been used for 100 years and is old technology, There is no limitation on fibre optic cable 100 Mbps is just now, in the future we are likely to need far more bandwidth than that, and this problem can easily be solved by advancement in transmission and reception, there is no limitation other than the speed of light for fibre optic cable. This is the future proofing everyone but you understands. Many people use the internet more than you clearly do, telling them they are greedy for wanting what 59 other countries already have is clearly foolish.

    • you can’t take for granted any currently available speed being suitable for basic web access going forward. if you jumped on a late 90’s dial up connection now it would be an awful experience because the amount of content on the average webpage has exploded. JPEG compression is so much lower despite images being 10X the resolution and there are all sorts of plugins running. emails are richer as well and attachment size allowances are huge on big providers like hotmail,gmail,yahoo etc.
      if you jumped back 2 decades you’d be able to find people saying that net access at home or on a mobile phone was a ridiculous luxury when cafes and libraries were available and also people saying why is email a necessity when we have Australia post, your use cases were once considered opulent too.

  7. On last night’s episode of Q&A, Turnbull did nothing to address persistent criticism of the Coalition’s NBN policy. Neither did he address — at all — Labor’s reworked NBN vision.

    He can’t though Renai.

    As I commented in a previous article, they’ve backed themselves into a political corner where if they are seen to address the technical shortcomings of the MtM NBN, Malcolm Turnbull will be seen (or at least be perceived as such) as lying to everyone about the whole thing.

    It’s more politically expedient for him to just stick to his guns and deal with the problems later, especially with an election happening, than it is to address the MtM’s flaws now.

      • Sadly, the shortcomings remain even if Turnbull does not acknowledge them.

        They do technically, but politically they are “invisible” because Labor just haven’t ridden them like Abbott did.

  8. Again, someone with a little bit of knowledge in this area could have poked holes in his monologue big enough for the Titanic. Such a shame the follow up question was so weak & obviously wrong, but it did appear to ruffle MT for a moment.
    Where were you Renai ;-)

  9. Why doesn’t Turnball address his personal investment in French Telecom’s fibre roll out to the premises – and explain why he considers that a sound investment – but not good enough for Australian business and consumers?

    As as online business owner – and the parent of a high schooler – i cannot tell you how insulting this ‘its fast enough’, ‘you can watch 5 movies’, ‘people don’t really want fast internet’, ‘we’re doing it cheaper’ (despite $20B cost blow out – but apparently that doesn’t matter) horsecrap is becoming.

    Business is supposed to compete online with the global community – yet our internet is so poxy that’s basically impossible. Our kids are supposed to be able to mix it with the worlds best and brightest – but if they can’t jump into a streamed lecture, or download large data packets without either exorbitant time and/or cost issues – then they can’t compete.
    “Innovation” – its a lovely buzz word Malcolm – but it doesn’t mean a damn thing when you tie the whole country to a set up that is obsolete before its delivered – and seems to be constructed entirely to protect the Foxtel/Telstra monopoly.

    If we – the taxpayer – have to fork out for this again in a few years – i think we should be entitled to sue this coalition government!

    • It is kinda surprising, considering they are supposed to be the business friendly party.

      Makes you wonder how much they actually talk to SME’s though, as anyone in IT could tell them with everything going XaaS (X as a service…or “the cloud”) any business with even a small office with a couple of people will grind to a halt unless they have a decent connection.

      • I’d wager he’ll use the same excuse as having his portfolio based in the caymen islands …. prevents any conflict of interest.

  10. Coalition clowns talking points stagnant much like the patchwork clusterfuck network they are rolling out. No surprises. I’d expect nothing more from them. At this stage the ignorance is business as usual but good to see they are no longer fooling as many as they were in 2013. Only a few dedicated to the preservation of copper gullible enough to believe their lies and that FttP wont be needed.

    • Coalition clowns talking points stagnant much like the patchwork clusterfuck network they are rolling out.

      I think you’re being too kind Hubert…

  11. Kudos for the corrections in your “mythbusting”, however yawn:
    https://delimiter.com.au/2016/06/09/fact-check-joyce-perpetuates-false-nbn-myths-qa/#comment-743737

    In case some have learnt to read basic charts, I’ve updated dropbox links with latest figures out of NBNCo. In their upcoming 8th annual report, the company has their first prospect of meeting one of their CPs’ rollout targets:
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/2cpmjufh576l5ch/brownfields-actuals-v-forecast.pdf?dl=0

    I’m sure all at delimiter would like to join me in congratulating management for overcoming this previously insurmountable challenge.

      • that’s a bit sad considering they sever the copper too as FttP leaves that connected for at least 18 months (assuming no extensions are granted).

        • sm copper isn’t severed when FTTN hits RFS. Same 18mths applies.

          tm analyse the charts for us;-)

          • What’s to analyse, as Dave said “FTTN more popular than FTTP? When compared directly over same time period, it’s not.”

            You can resort to personal attacks now Richard ;o)

          • TM Strange (but not surprising) you of all people would be calling out others for personal attack, do we need to link to your foul abuse? Loved your light to bits layer-2 support btw (SC gone quiet, very wrong).

            Anyway, explain what the charts show (not just parrot his tweet). Analyse the data for meaning, possible explanations (rofl).

          • lol, no doubt I’ll keep hearing about that one time for years to come. Classic :-)

          • TM Coopes’ data is actually insightful, we discussed his hypothesis in the teardown of Ferrers’ blogpost:
            https://delimiter.com.au/2016/01/04/detailed-analysis-of-nbn-cos-finances-shows-fttp-better-value-than-fttn/#comment-711493

            Loved your contributions to that discussion btw;-)

            Habit of stalkers recently to post seemly random links they obviously don’t understand, presumably in the hope they may stumble across something that may support their bile. Am I to assume any analysis (even basic) is beyond you?

          • Am I to assume any analysis (even basic) is beyond you?

            I don’t own you, feel free to assume whatever you like, you often assume much anyway ;o)

          • I’d have to disagree, Tm…

            Looking at the comments you do in fact “own Richard” ;)

    • “I’m sure all at delimiter would like to join me in congratulating management for overcoming this previously insurmountable challenge.”
      After halving targets no less than 3 times, it suddenly becomes over 8x less insurmountable.

  12. > While the NBN might be meeting some current customer needs now (albeit based on what they are currently prepared to pay based on what they’ll get), it completely ignores the future.

    Labor predicted what would happen in the future. In 2026 less than 1% would have 1Gbps and largest speed tier would be 12Mbps. 6 years down the track we find 25Mbps is higher than predicted by Labor. 25Mbps is higher because Telstra opted to not offer 12Mbps. The other speeds are lower tha predicted (particularly 250Mbps & 100Mbps).

    > A smarter way forward would be FTTdp to get the fibre to the pole or pit outside the house, but the NBN is too politically invested FTTN as a matter of face saving.

    A smarter way would have been in 2008 to target those areas with poor service (e.g. RIM, post 1970s suburbs) and exclude HFC areas from the initial rollout. This would have delivered an improvement the quickest. Replacing ADSL with FTTN in rural towns rather than wireless would have helped. But FTTP was Labor face saving so they couldn’t do that.

    The fault lies with the fibre fanbois not casting a critical eye across Labor’s plan and suggesting improvements. A solid Labor FTTP plan would have stopped MTM dead.

    • Well Mathew it’s good to see your BS of FTTN being faster than FTTP.

      But if you used it for the 2026 1% claim. Who knows in 10 years time it could be 50% on 1Gbps by then and we would all be laughing at you like you 50/12 claim

      • Except nobody is laughing because did you see in the last 6 months that even fewer people are connecting to 100Mbps and 84% are selecting 25Mbps or slower.

        Labor’s financial model for the NBN means that Australia is falling further behind. Replacing FTTN with FTTP won’t change that except for a shrinking elite.

        • Labors model?? You mean the Liberal model? It’s been the Liberals for the last three years…

        • “in the last 6 months that even fewer people are connecting to 100Mbps”
          [Citation Needed]
          For both stats (current AND previous)

        • “did you see in the last 6 months that even fewer people are connecting to 100Mbps and 84% are selecting 25Mbps or slower.”

          Really? How many was that last month? Or the month before? And it really doesn’t matter as the rest of the world will be gigabit in 3-4 years, so we can either convert or keep falling behind. With the Coalition, I reckon the only economy we will be able to compete with soon is Kiribati…and that’s only because they keep losing islands to Global Warming.

        • @ Mathew.

          Except nobody is laughing…

          Incorrect…

          I for one am laughing… at your blinkered, cherry-picked, ad nauseum, ad infinitum, irrational, “forever off topic” comments Mathew…

          Call it personal but FFS, after being so wrong about 50/12, you still haven’t learnt?

          Perhaps laughing is cruel, more feeling pity at such obvious perpetual obsequiousness.

          You’re welcome.

    • Labor predicted what would happen in the future.

      If their powers of prediction are so good, why did they lose the election? Hmm? ;o)

      • So far Labor’s predictions for the NBN have proven to be overly optimistic. There is every reason to believe that speed tier take up will be less than what Labor has predicted.

          • Tinman coalition are predicting 30% on 100Mbps by 2020 while labor predicting only 20% on 100Mbps by 2026

          • Obviously Labor has made no “predictions”…only written a business plan with possibilities.

        • Overly optimistic, except for the fact they predicted more people on 12Mbit than currently are.

          You don’t like admitting you used to harp on about 50% on 12Mbit, because now you harp on about 79% on 25Mbit or less. But In that 79%, it isn’t 50% on 12Mbit, so you have to skim over that to spin your story.

          Kindly piss off.

        • “There is every reason to believe that speed tier take up will be less than what Labor has predicted.”
          Except the obvious fact that 65% have chosen speeds 25Mbps and above, which is higher than the predicted 50%.

          Whoops. How embarrassing for you, Alain.

          Whoops. Force of habit.

          • C’mon Hotcakes…

            Let’s not let actuals get in the way of good ol’ estimations and accompanying 10 times a day spiel, so as to avoid scrutiny of the $29.Bb for all by 2016, MTM (FRAUDBAND) debacle…

            After all as Woolfe previously pointed out, the MQ estimations for FTTP were made as a minimum, for the network to be/remain profitable… rather than than being gospel, as Mathew so desperately tries to divert it all to.

        • Malcolm Turnbull likes to remind us that there were no iPhones before 2007. Yet now they are almost ubiquitous even in parts of what some say is the third world.

          This advance in expectation is further brought home when David Pogue records his experience in digitising his collection of family video tapes mostly in VHS format. Remember them? He was surprised how in some cases the picture occupied a tiny percentage of his 15 inch laptop. https://www.yahoo.com/news/the-time-to-rescue-your-old-videotapes-is-right-192129515.html This is because VHS format is only 333 x 480 pixels, yet a whole industry was build (and has almost vanished) around dealing with this picture quality, NOW far from acceptable.

          Yet, despite having everything else, but so that he can enjoy the status of being PM at the cost of keeping many of his colleagues inside his flapping tent, he refuses to extrapolate that experience into the next eight years, or beyond. Instead he parades around the country sprinkling half truths and over simplifications, bluffing the gullible wherever he goes.

          And the nation suffers for his ego.

    • The fault lies with the fibre fanbois not casting a critical eye across Labor’s plan and suggesting improvements.

      Oh, and we suggested improvements the whole time, like they should have used FttB for MDU’s to start with, had fewer POI’s and reworked the AVC/CVC plan (amongst other things) while all you suggested was it should be free to all.

      • I never suggested free to all. I pointed out that a network with speed tiers would create a digital divide which it has.

        I suggested that the fall in CVC pricing could be delayed to cover the cost of reducing AVC.

    • Mathew, this is simply not the case. The nbn corporate plans were for 3 year periods only. You are simply being dishonest.

      • The NBNCo Corporate Plans contain projections out until 2028.

        Is Labor being dishonest by suggesting a budget surplus in 10 years time?

        • Not if the evidence supports it, and they will revise their projection every year up until that 10 year point.

        • Mathew you know with those projection they had 100Mbps at the same cost as 25Mbps there is that no teir you keep complaining about

          • Shh, we only speak of the estimations that suit the narrative Jason… the other estimations are of no consequence because they are only, err, estimations.

            *sigh*

    • No, there was no ‘best way’ to rollout the NBN, every choice had good and bad points. Roll it out in the fastest, cheapest time frame and you have it building out from CBDs like everything else, so those who already have the best services get the upgrades first. That’s terribly unfair, but it would have been the fastest and cheapest route, getting a *lot* more customers onto the NBN during Labor’s term.

      Roll out choosing poorly serviced areas first and you have the same problem this rollout has had – you need to build substantial portions of the Transit network first, at great expense, and because you’re not rolling it out gradually from one area to the next, the expense is compounded, running it out to specific regions and then having to backfill all the areas you bypassed at the beginning. The additional downside to this is that new greenfields developments will either have no comms infrastructure or they will get copper first, which is extraordinarily idiotic.

      The way the rollout was progressed wasn’t entirely dissimilar to that anyway – it tried to get services out to regional communities as a priority. But it also prioritised greenfields developments, which I think was crucial – not doing so would have been tremendously wasteful. It’s just a shame that the LNP came along and £#@&ed about with this, so we’ve ended up with greenfields with copper anyway. What a travesty.

      You can’t have your cake and eat it too, Matthew. You can’t just plonk the Transit network out to the whole country in a single instant and start connecting houses in poorly serviced areas to FTTP – you have limited resources and they have to be scheduled and allocated. If you run all your transit network to ‘black spot’ areas, what about the greenfields developments? Oh, greenfields are ok, but *then* prioritise black spots? But what about regional communities who have essentially no services? Oh, that’s the kind of people you meant? Well what the £#@& do you think NBN Co were doing, deploying to regional communities? Making sure they were all owned by billionaires? FFS your lack of basic knowledge in a topic you run your mouth off about at every opportunity is appalling.

      • > Roll out choosing poorly serviced areas first and you have the same problem this rollout has had – you need to build substantial portions of the Transit network first

        The poorly serviced areas tend to be grouped together because they are the outer suburbs established from the 1970s onwards where Telstra started using longer copper runs and later RIMs.

        The transit network enabled ISPs to install ADSL2+ in many country exchanges.
        The transit network was built for developments. Just take a look at the greenfield sites on a map of any capital city.

        > The way the rollout was progressed wasn’t entirely dissimilar to that anyway

        The rollout overbuilt substantial areas of HFC and inner city areas where ADSL services were already of high quality.

        > But what about regional communities who have essentially no services?

        The regional communities that are receiving satellite or wireless not FTTP?
        The regional communities that are having their ADSL disconnected and replaced by wireless?
        Take a look at the Electorate of Grey and calculate how many towns were going to have ADSL replaced by wireless under Labor’s plan.

        > FFS your lack of basic knowledge in a topic you run your mouth off about at every opportunity is appalling.

        Your complete lack of comprehension on what Labor is planning to deliver is astounding. I’m surprised you consider that:
        * 84% on 25Mbps or slower is acceptable
        * 13% on 100Mbps is acceptable
        * <1% on 1Gbps in 2026 is acceptable.

        Are you in the top 1% in Australia? If not Labor are not planning to provide you with 1Gbps.

        • “Are you in the top 1% in Australia? If not Labor are not planning to provide you with 1Gbps”.
          Those bastards ….. How come you’re only telling us about this now …… Oh wait a minute. I se what u did there……. Champagne comedy Mats 👍

          • Don’t forget, Mat’s version of “choice” is that you can move house if you want a better connection.

          • “Don’t forget, Mat’s version of “choice” is that you can move house if you want a better connection.”

            Oh, so Mathew is Joe Hockey? It all makes sense now.

          • “Oh, so Mathew is Joe Hockey?”

            Joe could sue you for that slur to his, errr…, good name?
            Reminds me of the Young Frankenstein gag…”could be worse, could be raining…”

        • “I’m surprised you consider that:
          * 84% on 25Mbps or slower is acceptable
          * 13% on 100Mbps is acceptable
          * <1% on 1Gbps in 2026 is acceptable."

          I'm surprised that you consider that:

          * 85% on 24Mbps or slower is acceptable. This was the Coalitions alternative for 10 years.

          “Are you in the top 1% in Australia? If not Labor are not planning to provide you with 1Gbps.”
          What was to be provided (1Gbps to 93% of Australia) and what users choose to take up are two completely irrelevant statistics – 100% of users connected to the network could have gotten what they wanted/needed.

          How embarrassing for you, Alain.

          However, what is now to be provided (25Mbps to 100% of Australia) and what users want to take up (1% on 1Gbps in 2026) – now only 49% of Australians will get what they want/need.

        • I’ll ask again…

          What’s the percentage of customers choosing 25Mbps or over Mathew?

          Love the way you ignore that transition to slower MTM and then try to use it to bag FTTP… but I digress…

          Then tell us “again (as you did daily for 5 years or so) about 50% on 12Mbps by 2020 something … lol.

          GO

          You’re welcome

          • @ Simon M,

            Sadly our friend just can’t quite bring himself to admit this, as it doesn’t suit the narrative.

            Which is why I keep asking him ;)

    • You know Mathew that the coalition was looking to rollout FTTP and wireless to rural areas in 2007

    • “The fault lies with the fibre fanbois not casting a critical eye across Labor’s plan and suggesting improvements”
      Why would we concentrate on Labors efforts, when they’ve had zero say in the current demolition of the NBN for almost 3 years?

  13. Again, as I wrote months ago (https://delimiter.com.au/2016/04/07/call-arms-budde-says-fttdp-nbn-needs-support/#li-comment-728738), Turnbull can’t afford to waver in this choice because it was never about a technical solution or getting services to people faster or delivering them cheaper, or even a politically expedient vote winner.

    You can only consider that Malcolm and the LNP would approve a change to the MTM if FTTN and HFC were chosen for prudent project management and fiscal reasons. But the facts simply are that those weren’t the reasons for the changes, because the MTM flies in the face of facts. It is and always has been a fiction that those were the justifications for the MTM.

    So, given that, what were the motivating reasons behind the MTM and scrapping the majority of FTTP? Obviously propping up Telstra as they had the most to gain, and it’s very likely that Murdoch threw his weight around in there somewhere, too, given how Liberal party factions are merely political arms of corporations. Murdoch would have wanted the NBN to be killed, rich Telstra shareholders would have wanted an advantageous turnaround, preferably a firesale buyout that delivers them Australia’s national fibre network for a fraction of its construction costs. Turnbull’s plan delivers precisely those benefits.

    So would a changed MTM to something like FTTdp NBN continue to deliver Turnbull’s strategy? At this point, to a large extent, because the past three years have been all about entrenching the NBN’s MTM approach, any change at this point will necessarily have extremely limited scope or impact. Substantial long term contracts will have been signed with onerous penalties for breaking guarantees, contracts that will not be made public until or unless a new government seeks to do so (and I bet they’ll be challenged in court for breaches of Commercial in Confidence clauses, NDAs and privacy).

    But there would still be a risk with FTTdp if it was rolled out in any more than a token amount that it could still do substantial damage – best to leave it until it has been sold to Telstra, then they can role out FTTP or FTTdp and trap the benefits for a relatively small outlay.

    So Malcolm will wax lyrical about technology agnosticism and ‘wanting to give people the fastest possible infrastructure, but nothing comes for free, they’re taking the most prudent and responsible approach, contracts had been signed and guarantees given to hundreds of Australian small business operators with NBN construction contracts and unlike Labor he wasn’t going to go back on his word… Yada Yada Yada. Blah blah blah. Besides, they were already doing FTTdp (insert token FTTdp examples here), so they are doing it wherever prudent, where it was the best product for that deployment area’.

    Starting to sound familiar?

    The NBN under Prime Minister Malcolm ‘Political Vandal’ Turnbull will alter the MTM by dropping FTTN and HFC in favour for FTTdp or FTTP over his cold, lifeless corpse, and not a moment sooner.

    • 1,309 days ago today, I started a Twitter hashtag #TurnbullLitanyOfLies to dismantle Turnbull’s lies one by one!

  14. “Of the 1,050,000 –roughly- customers on the NBN, about 13 percent are ordering the 100 megabyte per second product. About 84 percent are ordering 25Mbps or less,” the Prime Minister said, adding that only 2 percent of NBN fixed wireless customers were ordering the highest speed 50Mbps offering on that technology.

    Less than 13% of Australians purchase houses with a value equal to or greater than Malcolm Turnbull’s Wentworth estate, therefore the building industry shouldn’t cater to these outlandish requirements.

    • If you want to send your kids to a private school or be treated in a private hospital we expect that you will contribute.

      If you want to be in the elite 1% with 1Gbps internet in Australia shouldn’t you expect to pay a significant premium?

        • If 1Gbps is available for all then you can consider it a public service.
          If it is available for an elite, then it is a private service and should be charged accordingly.

          • It’s a simple system Mathew, like any other utility (say water or electricity) the more you use, the more you pay (heck, even the phone system worked that way).

            It’s been that way for centuries.

            Are you asking for us to become a socialist country?

          • > the more you use, the more you pay

            Exactly, connection fees tend to remain the same and you pay for the usage.

            I pay the same electricity supply charge if I run a single bulb or leave an aircon running 24/7.
            I pay the same water supply charge if I live in a tiny apartment with no garden or an acre with lavish gardens and water features.
            I pay the same phone line rental if I make zero calls or hundreds of calls a day.

            Interestingly water supply charges are based on property values. We could fund FTTP using that approach.

      • If you want to send your kids to a private school or be treated in a private hospital we expect that you will contribute.

        So you don’t think the NBN is a utility and is actually a high level service like education of hospital? How about power and water, are you going to “revise” them into high level services as well?

        • What would you consider a 25Mbps internet service comparable to?
          * Water: ability to have a single shower with no one else using water?
          * Power: ability to have 3 lights and TV with choice between oven or the aircon?

          What would you consider a 1Gbps internet service comparable to?

          • Actually it is comparable to water. But the shower is just one of the devices using it.

            The NBN is comparable to the Water Pipeline. You build something that will service not only the current population, but the future population as well, and then you charge people for using it. Those who use a little, pay a little, those who use a lot, pay a lot.
            Genius.

          • > Those who use a little, pay a little, those who use a lot, pay a lot.

            Which is exactly the argument for removing speed tiers.

          • Which is exactly the argument for removing speed tiers.

            I look forward to you starting a change.org petition asking the LPA to switch to volume charging.

            I’ll sign it.

          • “I look forward to you starting a change.org petition asking the LPA to switch to volume charging.

            I’ll sign it.”

            Me too.

          • Mathew,

            You appear to me, to be the only socialist/Liberal party rusted on in Australia.

            That’s quite a feat.

            You’re welcome.

          • @Mathew
            “Which is exactly the argument for removing speed tiers.”

            Sure, it could be, but not necessarily. Its a different although related issue.

      • The difference is it costs private schools and private hospitals more to provide the extra services that are supposed to justify their existence.

  15. > In short, many experts believe Australians would take up the higher NBN speeds in much greater numbers if the NBN company reworked its much-criticised wholesale pricing model.

    In summary, Labor screwed up the NBN. The fibre fanbois still don’t want to admit it.

    • Yes they did.

      And?

      Are you hoping they get back in so they can do something about it?

      • Are you indicating that Labor have changed their policy to remove speed tiers? I don’t see that and I don’t see you advocating for that change!

        • Are you indicating that Labor have changed their policy to remove speed tiers?

          Are you suggesting that if the LPA stay in, they will drop them?

          • Well Tinman as we have Mathew loves to crow about the 1% on 1Gbps but what he also fails to look at is that by that time 100Mbps AVC cost would cost the same a 25Mbps so in a labor was going to a no teir model

          • Strange logic eh Tm?

            Bag one lot for speed tiers daily but never even acknowledge the others (lesser, retrograde, debacle) network, uses them too?

            Much like 79% on 25mbps or less – his own cherry picked amount to argue over. But even when we play his little game and ask, he refuses to acknowledge the percentage of customers choosing 25mbps or over?

            Let’s not forget his argument for the last 5 years was 50% on 12mpbs which he himself has er, proved himself wrong…

            So he has needed to alter the spiel.

            GOLD

        • Mathew: Create a change.org petition asking the LNP and Labor for the removal of speed tiers already!

          We will all sign it!

        • Mats can u hurry up an get that change.org petition up and running. Sooner u do it the sooner u can get back to hijacking threads ….. Go now, dinner can wait.

    • Haven’t we all been saying there was a problem with the CVC model? We had an argument about it just the other day.

      Now does that mean the entirety of the Labor plan was wrong? No it doesn’t.

      The Coalition plan on the other hand. Does pretty much nothing right. It has the problems of the Labor plan, and has added a pathetic technology mix to it.

      • > Haven’t we all been saying there was a problem with the CVC model? We had an argument about it just the other day.

        Except just above you said “Those who use a little, pay a little, those who use a lot, pay a lot.”
        CVC = usage
        AVC = supply

        • Wheres your change.org petition asking for both political parties to remove speed tiers.

          Where is your partisan free lobbying?

        • Not quite.
          You are conflating an RSP issue, CVC, with those who pay for the network, the users.

          Users pay the price dependant on the RSP that they choose.

          So for a User, who is ultimately paying the bill. If they choose to take a higher speed on a FTTP connection. They pay more to their RSP. That RSP then has to deal with that in their CVC purchases.

          If the RSP chooses not to pay enough for CVC and as such the user doesn’t get the performance they expect, the user can choose to move to a different RSP who may have purchased more CVC.

          Now the CVC issue does impact of course. But it is a separate issue that can be resolved by simply modifying the CVC pricing accordingly. As opposed to say FTTN to FTTP. Which cannot be simply resolved.

          One is the modification of a couple of Financial systems to change the costs, the other is a physical change of wires.

          To keep up the water analogy, One is paying differently for different pressure and volume allocation, the other is digging up the water pipes and putting in a new set.

          Its really not that hard Mathew, do try and keep up.

    • “In summary, Labor screwed up the NBN”

      You mean the Coalition…they have been enforcing that pricing for 3 years now.

  16. He’s delivered people ADSL and HFC imposed on them. He’s delivered nothing. 56 billion for what people already have is money laundering to Telstra.

    Still lobbying to save Foxtel and kill whole economies.

  17. It is really short sighted to look at the statistics around the current uptake on full speed NBN. People will sign up for speeds that match their current speed requirements. Present day, there are only a handful of services that require full speed. Building the NBN is such a mammoth task that we just cannot think about servicing today’s needs, we have to look to the future. We are hitting an age of exponential innovation. The countries that have the fastest speeds will invent and innovate incredible new services that the rest of the globe will just have to use. We have some really smart people in this country, let’s give them the tools so our kids can prosper. Look to the future, not to the present.

  18. What has not been discussed here and not taken into consideration is the on going costs of repairing an badly antiquated copper network already disrepair also considering that copper is a great conducter when lighting strikes occur where as fiber requires a direct hit and would be less of a problem.The other factor is upload speeds and and the on going problems when traffic increase on the old network the bandwidth is limited. Bussiness and Education and Health required good upload speeds and download speeds to work in the world of the future.It all seems to be about money now not investment in the future opening up Regional Australia too a forward advance into the future required for Turnbulls so call Innovation

  19. Turnball should be done for Treason to Australia . He invests his money in FTTP in France and Spain , but invests OUR $$ in a second rate 50 yr old copper network and some Labor FTTP network . 2 km from home, i see green boxes popping up and heading south. Where I am “was” slotted for FTTP under Labor , but they have been down my street and pulled telstra rope through to the last PMG box with me and my neighbor . The box is always under water when raining heavy and is collapsed . Telstra has been out and photos/ notes , and the contractors took photos about 18 mths ago ? Still waiting ! Going back to dial up with the LNP, back to Fire up computer , make coffee and breakfast and its ready to go slow PMG copper adsl with Telstra.

  20. As someone condemned to satellite I am astounded at the way we have multiple pages of discussion about speeds 100Mbs?, 1GBps? and totally ignore the 3% of those in the country who most need communications because they don’t live in or near large towns, a large proportion of whom are trying to modernise businesses, and have a fixed (forever?) maximum speed of 25/5Mbps.

    More importantly, they are required by NBN to have an average data use (uploads counted as well!) less than the annual increase in average data use across all NBN customers, and have an absolute data limit of much less than 100MB/28 day rolling period (not month), and no possibility of any increase in data quantities in the foreseeable future.

    And neither government nor opposition (nor it seems, the technical community) have the slightest interest in even listening to this problem. They both have an identical plan for rural Australia, which is to greatly widen the gap between the haves and have nots, even though both will be better off.

    Of course, the biggest problem is that while a majority of Australians seem to be in favour of better NBN, it is not a vote changer for most of them. And for most of us in satellite country, neither side is offering anything that is the slightest improvement compared to the other side anyway. But we don’t count – only about 3% of votes, mostly in very safe electorates, and even in these electorates probably <10% of votes.

    • Typically at delimiter Conroy = Good, by extension Satellite = Conroy = Good.

      Some of us are listening; my link to SkyMuster connection issues last couple days went unremarked.

      It would’ve been interesting to see what value govt would’ve achieve had it tendered alternatives or given the subsidy directly to end-users. But alas that is not Conroy’s thinking (inefficient GBE his answer for everything). Anyway that chicken has hatched.

      The reality is data options for remote Australians aren’t good and are expensive. The 3% (400k servicible, 200k activation) has had $2b + ISS spent on them to-date, plus indefinite ongoing subsidies.

      Satellite, as a broadcast medium, offers many entertainment and educational opportunities utilising local content storage. However the relatively small market unlikely to attract quality of resources required to execute these ideas.

      Most business opportunities can be captured with 25/5mbps (60+90GB). Demands more creative thinking (a country-raise speciality).

      One positive is the new management’s changes to make more of the second satellite’s capacity available.

      • As opposed to typical blinkered Richard everything not extreme right/cult ideological = bad…

        Tell us again in hindsight about the iron wires and then tell us again with a straight face and sans any foresight, about the copper wires.

        You’re welcome

          • Indeed JK and didn’t MT forever bag MQ’s satellites as well?

            The same satellites he now lauds?

            Funny all of these types of people are made from the same crepe paper. They and their positions are so flimsy, that they can change them to the complete opposite (to always suit the ideology/cult stupidity, of course) at a whim…

      • “Typically at delimiter Conroy = Good”

        A very Abbott thing to say…:)
        You have it completely wrong though…at Delimiter, Smart Technology=Good, and by extension, Satellite=Good Technology=Good

        Only the LNP seem to want to make technology about personalities…

      • “Typically at delimiter Conroy = Good”

        You obviously weren’t around on Delimiter during the Internet filter days ;)

        Or the ‘release the NBN corporate plan’ days ;)

          • +1 Renai…

            Conroy was considered anything but “good” back then, re: filtering. And I can recall many including myself congratulating the opposition at the time (now government) for their “then” opposition to it.

            Which emphasizes IMO that most here who claim to support FTTP, actually do support FTTP, not the politics of FTTP…

            So, what’s your excuse for simply agreeing with the right leaning political position, ooh, what about 99.99% of the time Richard?

            (Disclaimer: the percentage may vary upwards by 0.01%)

            Your welcome.

          • @Rizz “that most here who claim to support FTTP, actually do support FTTP, not the politics of FTTP…”

            Indeed, there’s been plenty of angst here about Labor and its failings just most of us moved on with the rest of Australia 3 years ago so now we blame the current muppet’s for the current issues.

            Labor picked the right ‘tech’. When they played politics it cost them and us … when they listened to actual experts they managed to decide on half decent stuff.

            “(Disclaimer: the percentage may vary upwards by 0.01%)”

            perfect opportunity for an ‘Up to’!

          • @Rizz – Conroy was considered anything but “good” back then

            Hell yeah, and most of the “good” things he took credit for weren’t even his ideas (like a FttP NBN).

    • do most rural places have copper phone lines ? imagine trying to argue for installing them if Turnbull was a minister at the time! Fibre is so much better than copper over the type of distances we are talking about for rural areas, I’d like to hear an argument for the benefits of remote areas getting FTTP from someone who really knows the tech and the costs. More than anything I’d like to see satellite replaced with something else (no prospects of improving satellite significantly?) and I do pity the people who are getting thrown off good ADSL2 connections because of their proximity to a newly installed Node cabinet and then wind up on wireless or far worse, satellite with more latency than they have ever experienced.

    • @JDNSW

      “And neither government nor opposition (nor it seems, the technical community) have the slightest interest in even listening to this problem. They both have an identical plan for rural Australia, which is to greatly widen the gap between the haves and have nots, even though both will be better off.”

      Feel free to come up with something because the 93% FttP deal was the best chance you had of getting off Sat/FW any time soon. Unfortunately the subsidies from that 93% only stretch so far so its not possible to reach that last 7% right this minute.

      Under the 93% FttP scheme after it was all said and done, if it wasn’t immediately privatise that last 7% could be reduced further.

      Now we have to build the MTM. When that is finished we might be lucky and it won’t be losing money; we then need to (re)start building the 93% FttP all over again for as much if not more $$ (assuming there isn’t a delay waiting for the MTM to pay itself off) this means for that 7% you are stuck that much longer on Sat/FW.

      • Right from the inception of the NBN we were assured that the long term satellite would be virtually as good as FTTP (including a verbal assurance to myself by Conroy), with apologists emphasising that anyone who doubted this was a Liberal party stooge and an idiot.

        Those of us who were doubtful of this at least expected that data quantities and costs would be somewhere in the same ballpark as the rest of the country. Now, with the system actually working, we see how cruelly we were misled. The maximum data quantities allowed by NBN would be largely eaten up just maintaining software updates for a typical family with half a dozen or more devices. Using the service for entertainment except very occasionally is clearly impossible, and using it to run most businesses is very difficult, with any use of cloud services almost impossible.

        This against a background of governments and businesses at all levels urging everyone to move all their activity onto the internet, and using this as an excuse to shut local offices and branches. Schools and tertiary institutions almost universally expect their students to be able to have free use of internet data at home, even for those students travelling 50km+ each way to attend classes.

        Twenty-five years or more ago the country found it feasible to provide fixed line copper phone services to almost all of the “3%”, to give up to date phone systems that provided most, if not all of the phone services available to urban consumers. Surely something similar using fibre could be devised today? Maybe not for immediate implementation, but as a way forward, instead of just telling those with most need for communications “sorry, you don’t matter and never will”.

        • “Surely something similar using fibre could be devised today?”

          That was the 93% FttP plan. Once that fibre was in it doesn’t need to really change for the next 70-100 years leaving that last % to be whittled away as revenues allow.

          Sadly we’ve the cluster fuck we have now and nothing can really change that. Thank the Nationals and Liberals for that (and anyone that voted for them).

          If there was a magic bullet it would have been done from the start (heck the % was increased up to 93 when they did the math as it was originally even less).

          • Having followed this since its inception, there has never been anything proposed to reduce the premises covered by satellite except bringing small towns in and out of other coverage.

            All we have ever heard is that satellite would be just as good as fibre except for greater latency, and magic software would mean this would disappear as well. The satellite system is unchanged from Labor’s proposal, except that only this year do we hear about draconian data restrictions – and I have it in writing from a member of the government that this is nothing to do with the government, but purely an NBN decision! (Of course, given the known data capacity of the satellites, and the known rate of increase of data usage, it should have been obvious that this was coming. But again we were assured eighteen months ago when severe restrictions on the ISS were imposed that all would be sunshine with Sky Muster. Unfortunately, some even believed this, although in hindsight anyone should have seen through it.)

          • draconian data restrictions – and I have it in writing from a member of the government that this is nothing to do with the government, but purely an NBN decision!

            Well, the LPA did decide to double the coverage of the satellites over the original plan, I guess they are worried with the extra users the beams will become even more congested than they are in some places and introduced the caps to try and counter that. One positive is that they are talking about a third satellite now (but no firm plans that I’ve heard, so it may just be an election sweetener).

            Much like the original CAN, the network grows outwards over time, so who knows, depending on where you actually are you may be able to get FW or even FttN at some stage in the future.

          • “Having followed this since its inception”

            Correct its a bit of an educated hypothesis in that sense (and again would only be after NBN was completed … that 7% was(will) never ever be anything else ‘during’).

            The NBN could easily just end up being sold at that point instead too (whim and fancy of the Govt of the day etc) and such a thing would have relied on NBN not being sold as no private enterprise is every going to bother with attempting to cover the remaining to get too 100% without someone else paying for it to do so.

            What I am saying there was 1 remote ‘hope’ that the 7% might at some point change from a wireless to wired fibre solution. Now its all but entirely a pipe dream sadly.

            “All we have ever heard is that satellite would be just as good as fibre except for greater latency, and magic software would mean this would disappear as well.”

            so you believed “sooner, faster, cheaper” too? because all that sounds like it came from folk that haven’t the first clue about the technologies they were marketing.

            “and I have it in writing from a member of the government”

            We have those on National TV out right telling fibs to the Australian public and its not through ignorance.

          • “All we have ever heard is that satellite would be just as good as fibre except for greater latency”

            I call bullshit.

          • Tim,
            I agree. Never have I heard that satellite was meant to be as good as FTTP. Everyone knew that their would be severe limits to this make-do fix.

    • Yep, It is unfortunate.

      The Satellite situation was meant to be the remotest areas, where it just wasn’t feasible to do anything else.
      It never would have been the best connection no matter what situation, but the cost of the satellite would have at least been covered by the rest of us. Add to that the increase in numbers since the coalition MTM and the Sat situation has only gotten worse.

      Now you are paying through the teeth for a solution that is oversubscribed.
      The original Labor plan wasn’t perfect, but at least it limited the numbers on the Sats to some degree, which would have meant a better service overall for Sat users.
      Now with the coalition having already pushed more users to Sat, and the new Labor plan not really addressing the issue, it kind of looks like you are boned.

      All I can suggest is that at least on the new Labor plan, they intend to address some of the failures of the coalition, starting with FTTN. HFC is going to be looked at, and my assumption is that the Wireless and Satellite footprints will as well.

      I would strongly suggest you send an email to each of your local representatives (state and federal) and ask the question. I’d be especially hitting up the National members, as they should have been fighting the good fight for you guys right from the start, and they have really proven to be a lame duck of late.

      • Forget sending an email – back in March I sent my federal representative a three page letter on the subject. And got a four line reply saying it was nothing to do with him or the Minister. I have given copies of both letters to local media, but they seem to have little interest.

        • What about the alternatives? Whenever I email a member of government, I always include every other representative. They tend to be more responsive when not in government, and government tends to be more responsive when they see you have included the other guys.

          The only real way to send a message in our 2 party system is to use your preferences to deny a primary vote.

          I get a lot of people don’t like one or all of Labor, Liberal or National etc (me included), but people keep on believing that they can only vote for one or the other. This simply isn’t the case.

          The key point is YOU control your vote. You can choose to vote for someone else, an independent or a minor party, the chances are they won’t get in, in which case YOU can then choose where to put your preference.
          So if you are totally against a party, you can always preference the other party first, but give your primary vote to someone else. That way you either get someone in who you agree with, OR you still get the party you prefer. BUT you send a message.

          The 2 parties have people whose jobs are purely focused on looking at the vote distribution and changes.
          When those employed to look at this, see that they lost a large percentage of votes to an independent or minor who is similar to their own ideals, they will have to address why.

          The same goes for the senate. If you vote one way in the House of Reps, you should vote for a similar but different party in the senate. The senate is the only check we have on the house of reps. And a senator from a small party/independent, will be a lot more approachable by their electorate. Whilst a major party senator toes the party line no matter what.

          It is literally the only sway we have in a 2 party system. Do not squander it.

          • Indeed Woolfe … they care and notice when pref %’s change or votes drop (even in the ‘safe’ seats).

            Apathy leads to the BS we have now sadly.

    • There is a very good reason and it has been made very clear why you are stuck with satellite at your location.

      The percentage of Australian population assigned to the satellite reside in places where the terrain prevent access by vehicles and equipment that are required to deploy optical fiber and fixed wireless. Satellite broadband is the only solution to this problem.

      Prior to satellite broadband coverage, there are areas in Australia that would not even had access to telephone!

      • Not many places without access to telephone, and certainly not here. It was economically and technically feasible to provide a telephone line here twenty-five years ago – has technology gone backward that rapidly?

        And the nearby village is also getting satellite – no problem wioth access there; they have a state highway access less than 30 minutes to one of the largest inland cities in the country, and there is already at least two fibre trunk lines (neither NBN) and a telstra fibre to the exchange.
        I find it a little difficult to see why the terrain prevents access by vehicles and equipment!

          • Twenty-five years ago it was feasible to lay copper for nine kilometres to a single house. In the last twenty-five years the terrain and access has not changed significantly, so I am not sure what the case you are resting is.

            I, along with most non-urban residences in Australia was selected for satellite because we have almost no political weight.

            I do not, however seriously suggest that locations such as this should necessarily get fibre, although it does have advantages, but certainly this and many other locations should have been seriously considered for wireless, which has far less restrictive data caps and far lower latency.

        • “It was economically and technically feasible to provide a telephone line here twenty-five years ago”

          Australia’s first telephone service was launched in Melbourne in 1879 and they only provided it to you 25 years ago! LoL

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_in_Australia

          They are not going to roll out several kilometers of fiber just to connect just one residential customer just because the customer thinks that 100mbps can be achieved. This is false because the majority of hosts that you download files from do not send files to you at 25Mbps regardless of your download speed. Check the speed of your next download in your browser. You’ll be lucky it gets to 1 megabyte per second (8 Mbps)

          Until the entire network is completed, download speeds will be limited to the upload bitrates of *other* Internet users and hosting services.

          “has technology gone backward that rapidly?”

          Something has gone backwards and it’s got nothing to do with technology.

          The Space System/Loral Ka-band 1300 Platform is state-of-the-art broadband satellite technology.

          http://www.sslmda.com/

          The NBN satellites use the same base technology as Viasat-1 broadband satellite in United States which serves customers in Alaska, Canada, Unites States and Hawaii.

          Viasat is about to launch Viasat-2 later this year around the same time the second NBN satellite is launched

          I have experienced Viasat satellite broadband in the U.S. many times and able to browse and download from websites, watch NetFlix, make Skype video calls, and log into MMOPRG’s without any problem and Ive seen Telehealth & long distance learning applications in action.

          • Well, the house was only built twenty-five years ago, so your comment about how old telephones are is just slightly irrelevant. Of course the phone line is only that old.

            I think you miss the point about the LTSS – I have yet to encounter any use where a higher speed than the 25 I get is inadequate, so I have no need for higher speed. The critical problem is the tiny data allowance mandated by NBN, which even today precludes any regular use of video for anything, whether entertainment, education or telehealth, let alone software updates for more than one or two devices or cloud backups etc. And for myself, the data allowanceis generally adequate (today, but probably not in a few years) – but it would clearly be inadequate for a family with a number of children at school, or for anyone attempting to make extensive use of IT in a business for example.

  21. I’m always irritated by the ‘only 13% of households have 100Mb/s’ argument because it misses a few things.

    1. Of that 13%, how many are on FTTP?
    2. Of the remaining 87%, what portion are on FTTN, FTTP, Wireless, or Satellite?
    3. Of that 87% on FTTN, Wireless, or Satellite, how many can achieve 100Mb?

    • Toowoomba is the proving ground. provision of backhaul was allocated on the assumption that surrounding rural towns could piggy back with no problem. The city was covered in FTTP except one splodge of FTTN (basically it isn’t peppered all over the place) and the problem now is that people are actually demanding speeds the fibre leading into the city isn’t sufficient to provide. Word of mouth and ubiquity of service will get people trying out higher speeds and that in turn will motivate new ideas from business.
      when the nation is serviced largely by FTTN then people will start to realise what we really need, luckily enough FTTP has been installed that there is something to compare to (unlike with the ADSL era, HFC was so poor at peak times that people preferred more consistent but lower average ADSL2 speeds)

  22. Absolutely right, Malcolm shows NO respect for the electorate.

    He insults our intelligence at every opportunity and portrays a very arrogant attitude.

    The only voters I’ve found to support him fully are either those that are very rich, or the simple minded mining bogans (especially in Perth) who equate NBN with Netflix and already have Foxtel subscriptions anyway so they don’t care.

  23. I’m going to vomit if I hear him compare 2016 figures to launch year or 2013 figures again. It shouldn’t work but it does, he convinces people that massive projects can begin at their maximum install rate and make trained staff for what was formerly a niche product in the Nation just materialise from thin air.
    forgetting the notion of ramp up for a second Labor gave less concrete commitments than Turnbull and the ones that were concrete didn’t come to pass because they were removed from office but what should count is that Turnbull and Abbotts really clear claims about why 93% FTTP should be dropped were lies and could not be achieved. the nation does not have FTTN blanketing it,not even close and the *crud* speeds guaranteed are no longer guaranteed.
    OH and he said Rudd was conducting a scare campaign for saying Fibre on demand would be upwards of three thousand dollars and the truth ? so prohibitively expensive it isn’t even offered !

    This guy should be kicked to the curb (no FTTdp pun intended) but sadly it looks like it won’t happen. despite polling making the election look close the votes are in seats already held by Labor and won’t claim them a victory. best hope is a hung parliament because people besides the coalition who would back FTTN are hard to find if not nonexistent

  24. “In addition, internationally telcos such as AT&T, Google, Verizon and more are talking up the need for such speeds.”

    Verizon first launched its FiOS all-fiber (FTTP) broadband and TV service on September 22, 2005 the aim being to replace copper with fiber. Initially deployed with BPON but later changing to with faster GPON technology.
    Verizon offers several speed tiers.
    In June 2012 they announced FiOS Quantum which doubled every tier and introduced a new 300Mbps.
    In July 2013 Verizon FiOS announced the highest speed tier of 500/100Mbps for home and small business.
    In July 2014 Verizon FiOS announced that all speed tiers would match download and upload speeds.

    The current speed tiers (Mbps) are 50/50, 100/100, 150/150, 300/300, 500/500

    AT&T are currently deploying GigaPower, first launched in Austin Texas, to 100 candidate cities. The initial network was deployed at 100Mbps, but in 2013 they announced that speeds up to 1Gbps will be available in 2014 at no extra cost.

    Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan is a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) initiative to improve Internet access which was unveiled March 2010. The FCC was directed to create the plan by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

    Download the plan.
    Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan
    https://www.fcc.gov/general/national-broadband-plan

  25. ** Dinosaurus Nettus has spoken! **

    **..and so has that Quantum Computing guy from New York..(like seriously Australia) **

    -> I WANT MY CLEVER COUNTRY BACK: SHORTEN LIVES FOREVER! (..AND SO DOES THE LEGACY OF THE ONE THEY CALLED HEAVY KEVVY!)

    • wait: stop the presses- Pauline Hanson said what now?

Comments are closed.