NBN takes on delivery partners to deploy HFC network

26

news NBN Co has inked deals with six delivery partners to deliver its growing broadband network to premises sitting within Telstra’s hybrid-fibre coaxial (HFC) cable footprint.

Following a contract sourcing process that NBN Co said was carried out over multiple stages, the firm has appointed Lend Lease, Broadspectrum, Fulton Hogan, Downer, ISGM and BSA to carry out the construction of the Telstra HFC portion of the NBN network.

The network expansion will leverage the existing copper Telstra cable TV network to take broadband to homes and businesses, enabling the NBN to be deployed “quickly and cost effectively” under the Coalition Government-prescribed ‘multi-technology mix’ (MTM) policy.

In HFC areas, the MTM is bringing fast broadband via optic fibre to the street, then legacy copper cable into the premises – a move that has been criticised by some for not ‘future-proofing’ Australia’s digital economy.

The existing HFC network will be upgraded to be able to achieve wholesale speeds up to 100Mbps download and 40Mbps upload.

“The NBN network is now available to more than 2.6 million homes and businesses around Australia,” said Peter Ryan, NBN Co’s Chief Network Engineering Officer. “With this additional work from our delivery partners, the HFC network will be deployed at scale to enable NBN to meet its 2020 targets.”

“With this process we have ensured the most appropriate delivery partners are doing the work. They have enormous experience in construction in the telecommunications industry which will help us roll it out faster,” Ryan said.

Under the HFC delivery agreement announced in April 2016, Telstra will manage the six delivery partners during the construction of the network within its HFC footprint “in close consultation with NBN,” said Ryan.

Telstra has this week launched an internal recruitment programme aimed to fulfil its workforce needs as the firm prepares for the upgrade its HFC network in preparation for the NBN expansion.

NBN has already launched its HFC broadband product on the network formerly owned by Optus in Redcliffe, Queensland, with customers being able to subscribe to the NBN network from June.

Image credit: NBN company

26 COMMENTS

  1. “With this process we have ensured the most appropriate delivery partners are doing the work. They have enormous experience in construction in the telecommunications industry which will help us roll it out faster,” Ryan said.

    Comparisons with the original management’s choice of inexperienced delivery contractors and subsequent failures welcome.

    Choice posts an interesting experience of an FTTB customer:
    https://www.choice.com.au/electronics-and-technology/internet/connecting-to-the-internet/articles/getting-fttb-fibre-to-the-basement-nbn

    Conroy banned the tech; MDUs left unable to order a service indefinitely whilst Quigley counted them as RFS (ignoring his own CP’s definition)!

    AVC not activated exposes continuing NBNCo delivery shortfalls but overall demonstrates the advantage of reusing existing infrastructure to deliver a product meeting customer demanded speed cheaper and faster than a full fibre alternative.

    Where would NBNCo be today with competent guidance from the beginning?

    • “Where would NBNCo be today with competent guidance from the beginning?”
      It wouldn’t exist :)
      As we all know the private sector wasn’t upgrading their tech or willing to dump millions/billions into a sector that Telstra would overbuild or charge exorbitant prices to lease their ducts while only maintaining it to a barely workable condition.
      So, there would be no NBNCo, business as usual.

      • The private sector was already investing billions; halted with Conroy’s ascension to power. ACCC had already successfully mandated infrastructure access with local loop unbundling and exchange access.

        Trujillo needed to be removed, however he’d resigned before NBNCo was even formed. Conroy never re-engaged Telstra.

        Right there would be no NBNCo; tens of billions taxpayer’s money saved. Fixed line network upgrade would be completed today (as is the case in many markets).

        • “The private sector was already investing billions”

          Not in fixed line last mile technology they weren’t. Only in wireless based standards (remember the Telstra hotspots?).

          “ACCC had already successfully mandated infrastructure access with local loop unbundling and exchange access”

          They may have mandated that, but the games Telstra played with granting access as mandated, up to and including court cases made that mandate a farce.

          For the fullest public report on this, please refer to the excellent (and from what I can see, only) reasonably comprehensive history put together in Paul Fletcher’s book “Wired Brown Land”.

          “Right there would be no NBNCo”

          The reason NBNCo was formed in the first place was because the private sector couldn’t deliver or in Telstra’s case, wouldn’t, as Trujillo submitted a non-complaint bid, even when directed to by his own Board.

          So if you’re looking to point the finger at why NBNCo was created, the Australian market did, with one player (Telstra) taking the lead due to it’s last mile monopoly that it thought it could bully the government into doing it’s bidding.

          The NBN was created because the market had failed, and any attempt at government regulation was stalled in courts and negotiations as much as possible, to Telstra’s benefit.

          “Conroy never re-engaged Telstra”

          He didn’t need to. As demonstrated in the previously mentioned book, the Howard Coalition government tried that, many times. As I’ve stated earlier, how long do you continue in a bad marriage before you call time and look at other options?

          “Fixed line network upgrade would be completed today”

          That actually might have come true … but here’s the thing … it wasn’t going to be on an Australian telecommunications market timetable, it was going to be on Telstra’s timetable.

          Where one company monopolises the market like Telstra does, resists market oversight, and actively leverages it’s position to prevent other possible competitors entering a market competing with last mile copper (which was Optus introducing HFC), then the Australian telecommunications market doesn’t exist as an entity any more. Something that should leave even right wing capitalists aghast due to lack of market competition (which is suposed to allow greater efficiency, as the ideology goes).

          • So adsl2+ investment never happened, nor the competitive dark fibre interconnects? Regional HFC nor FTTN were built?

            Private sector expressions of interest were rejected (discovered FTTN would require access to the CAN; comical incompetence). Trujillo was an impediment, but resigned before NBNCo was even formed. Conroy never re-engage incoming CEO Thodey despite his public announcement he was prepared to work with govt (offer demonstrated by subsequent DA renegotiations and transfer of assets for no additional cost).

            NBNCo failure is extraordinary, their belief it was possible to go it alone shown to be remarkable hubris (pointed out at the time).

            Two successful wholesale separations Chorus (NZ) & Openreach (UK) demonstrate the fallacy of your argument in like markets. Several other upgrades in Europe where govt partnered with the incumbent telcos. All finishing today with tens of millions more premises and cost of taxpayers in the low billions. NBNCo is 25% complete, $20+b sunk to date!

            Yet they believe capitalism & private sector the problem;-)

          • @ Richard

            ‘So adsl2+ investment never happened, nor the competitive dark fibre interconnects? Regional HFC nor FTTN were built?”

            ADSL2 was only switched on after that big bad Conroy sucked up to and/or convinced Sol and Co to do so, it wasn’t magical market driven wonderment, it was tooth an and nail. Keeping in mind by that time, Japans fibre had already overtaken copper connections…

            As for the rest, all I can say is… you must be jesting, dreaming or so brainwashed by your cult that you can’t or refuse to see actuality of market failure in fixed line comms here in Oz.

            But wasn’t your first post grad (ironically) Market Failures?

            WTF were you asleep, whacked or too brainwashed by the cult to understand err, market failures?

            Anyhoo…

            I won’t repost fellow cult member Forbes telling you and the rest of you backward thinkers here that copper is obsolete, again… everyone (except you) seems to understand it – even the lap dog I think would acknowledge, FTTP is the end goal…

            So here’s another gem.

            Another fellow “lifelong libertarian Republican? having to admit…

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5lZPWNFizQ

            Waxman: In other words you found your view of the world, your ideology was not right, it was not working?

            Greenspan: Precisely, that’s precisely the reason I was shocked because I’d been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well…

            D’oh…

            Let’s hope it doesn’t take you another 40 years to understand your cult ideology is flawed… but then if you wont even accept copper is obsolete well…

            You’re welcome – apology accepted.

    • “overall demonstrates the advantage of reusing existing infrastructure to deliver a product meeting customer demanded speed cheaper and faster than a full fibre alternative.”
      Oh of course. So we’re still on track for 25Mbps to 100% of Australians by the end of 2016, are we?

      “Where would NBNCo be today with competent guidance from the beginning?”
      On track to bring world economy-standard FTTP to 93% of Australians by 2022.

  2. “Comparisons with the original management’s choice of inexperienced delivery contractors and subsequent failures welcome.”

    Considering the “inexperienced delivery contractors” are the same ones that Telstra themselves use … I find your attempted link to “original management” incorrect, but wryly amusing.

    “Where would NBNCo be today with competent guidance from the beginning?”

    Considering that Ziggy/Morrow are actually using the company that was set up by that “guidance”, and continues to use the principles and processes put into place, you’ve just contradicted yourself without realising it.

    *chuckle*

    • http://www.cso.com.au/mediareleases/27699/underground-asset-location-advice-from-an-expert/

      “The new plans coming out from NBN are absolutely disgraceful – they’re the worst I’ve ever seen.
      There’s almost literally nothing on them, it’s a line on a map and that’s all. You can’t tell where you can hook on to it, you can’t tell if its laid by itself or with other cables, what size conduit it is in, there’s no details on it.”

      Sounds like the new management are doing a wonderful job?

    • you’ve just contradicted yourself without realising it.

      Not the first time, wont be the last.

    • @m NBNCo’s failures are well documented (yet still denied by delims). After rejecting their initial tenders (experience was too expensive) they went their own way.

      Syntheo’s (awarded WA, SA & NT) performance saw them kicked out of the NT in Mar 2013, excluded from new contracts in SA & WA by Aug 2013.

      Visionstream contract to complete 200k premises in TAS awarded Mar 2011. By Dec 2013 they’d passed 25,962 serviceable premises (brownfield + greenfields).

      Downer EDI subcontractor Techdrill appointed voluntary administrators in Jan 2015.

      However Quigley’s greenfield Fujitsu contract possibly the biggest windfall. The initial 12 mth, $100m contract awarded May 2011. Over a year later NBNCo’s AR12 reported 503 greenfield activations.

      Despite every rollout milestone missed by massive margins, NBNCo management awarded themselves bonuses.

      Example of the failures pointed out at the time (shouted down by the fiberartzi):
      http://www.afr.com/business/telecommunications/nbn-contractors-fail-to-deliver-20130401-j0yr1

      Delims still fail to acknowledge the significant re-engagement of contractors after new mangagement, changes to contracts and design. Contractors had basically downed tools, such was their disfunctional relationship late 2013.

      You imagine contradictions, Brisy line boy gullibility agrees. Demonstrating the same ignorance he showed denying these acknowledged failures as I flagged them at the time.

      • “NBNCo’s failures are well documented”

        They are, particularly those before the Coalition thanks to greater transparency, but they just aren’t the failures you imagine.

        “experience was too expensive”

        That’s an interesting interpretation of being gouged, which was the stated reason.

        I see you mention Syntheo, Visionstream, and Downer subcontractors. When you contract your work out, and promise NBNCo that you can do it for the stated price, and you don’t deliver, what normally happens Richard? Not just in telecommunications, but any industry? Is that the company who went to the market to tender, or is those that won that work and promised something they couldn’t deliver? So how was that NBNCo’s fault?

        “Over a year later NBNCo’s AR12 reported 503 greenfield activations.”

        And where Fujitsu didn’t deliver, and couldn’t be reached for comment. But that’s still NBNCo’s fault … because … why exactly?

        “Despite every rollout milestone missed by massive margins”

        Remember that thimble Richard.

        https://delimiter.com.au/2016/07/13/telstra-kicks-off-recruitment-program-deal-nbn-hfc-contract/#comment-753105

        *chuckle*

        “Example of the failures pointed out at the time”

        Attributed to the lack of splicing. Something the contractors were supposed to handle. Using the agreed upon contract to pay for. So … once again … not NBNCo’s problem.

        “Delims still fail to acknowledge the significant re-engagement of contractors after new mangagement, changes to contracts and design”

        That’s a known fact. Lots of snouts in that trough now there’s less accountability and lack of transparency. And let’s not forget the budget increase to the MTM right Richard?

        “Contractors had basically downed tools, such was their disfunctional relationship”

        Between themselves Richard. Yes, that was dysfunctional. If Visionstream/Syntheo/etc have a problem with their subbies, how is that NBNCo’s problem again?

        “You imagine contradictions”

        Oh, I don’t imagine them, I just witness them.

        “Brisy line boy gullibility”

        I have no idea what that even means. Is that supposed to be an insult to me due to the city I live in? Because if it is, at least call it Brissy, or Bris Vegas, even just Brisbane. The rest of the attempted sledge (if that’s what it is, I honestly don’t know) is incomprehensible.

        “Demonstrating the same ignorance”

        Unless you’re going to quote specific instances, then you can’t simply blanket call it ignorance. Maybe I did actually ignore them because I thought others answered sufficiently, maybe I had no idea because I was away on holidays, or perhaps I could have missed them entirely. Either way, that you would assume blanket ignorance speaks volumes about your mindset Richard, not mine.

        • @m more transparency today than ever.

          choosing contractors that fail because they don’t have the capability to deliver is NBNCo’s fault. It’s called performing due diligence. It was predictable (given their experience), subsequent failures downplayed or ignored. Quigley was still claiming on time and budget as he was shown the door when every piece of evidence contradicted his positions.

          Your thimble has no equivalence. If someone tries to sell me a bucket and I see a thimble I’d call it out. If I’m stupid enough to buy it, responsibility is on me.

          If I took every supplier’s talk as fact and forced price below cost of competent delivery, restricted to then choosing incompetent suppliers I’d be out of business (govts just reach further into taxpayers’ pockets).

          Is their any failure NBNCo is responsible for?

          Ignorance Brisy line boy (HC) directed, actually personified.

          • “more transparency today than ever.”

            That you would say such a thing considering the shenanigans that have gone on in the past year (I’d say longer, but we’ll keep it to recent events) smacks of one eyed partisan ignorance.

            “choosing contractors that fail because they don’t have the capability to deliver is NBNCo’s fault.”

            Considering those same contractors are now dealing with NBNCo … what stapped them before hmmm? Lack of funds? They should have accurately costed their tenders. Lack of manpower? They should have factored that in. Missed deadlines? Penalities did apply (that’s what penalties are for Richard). You have a surprising ignorance of outsourcing.

            “Quigley was still claiming on time and budget”

            He was claiming on budget. I can’t recall him stating that it was on time. I do recall him stating, several times, that it was 9 months behind, and by September 2013, they’d made up 3 months to be six months behind.

            “he was shown the door”

            Wrong again. He resigned.

            “Your thimble has no equivalence. If someone tries to sell me a bucket and I see a thimble I’d call it out”

            Excellent. I hope to see you calling out the meagre MTM targets any day now.

            “If I took every supplier’s talk as fact”

            Tell me, how do you assess a tender? Like everyone else does?

            “to then choosing incompetent suppliers”

            Some of which are still tendering and getting MTM work today? So where’s your complaints about them?

            “Is their any failure NBNCo is responsible for?”

            Sure there is. They were six months behind at the 2013 election. I guess you could call that a failure. They chose to fibre up MDU’s, which personally I thought was a can of worms best left unopened and run fibre to an apartment’s MDF rather than to the individual apartments. But I did applaud the ambitiousness of it, flawed though I thought it was.

            Otherwise, pre-2013 election, I thought NBNCo did a stellar job considering the challenges that were thrown at it, burdened with the additional challenge of creating a company from scratch.

            Morrow has done little more than the beginning of a single technology stack (FTTN) rollout which has yet to get going in earnest, and borrowed from one already deployed (HFC) while resting on Quigley’s FTTH, Wireless and Satellite rollout laurels. And he didn’t have to set up the company.

          • What public information was released under Quigley? No weekly progress, no quarterly financial updates. The man dropped his own requirement premises deemed RFS could actually order a service (duh), then when he still missed targets (had to wait months after a quarter for any numbers) he switch to the Orwellian construction commenced metric.

            The contractor mention doesn’t work with NBNCo anymore.

            NBNCo’s targets aren’t “meagre”, aggressive but realistic. Quigley’s targets were delusional (pointed out at the time), yet the entire funding case built around them. IRR of 7.1% still claimed by some, highlighting performance failures squealed down with abuse.

            If Quigley and the rest of his underperforming team weren’t pushed they should have been.

            By Sep 2013 NBNCo wasn’t 6 months behind (Quigkey claiming even that would be recovered; ontime, onbudget); they were hitting 15% of targets, ramp-up was non-existent (5th year), MDU without connections nor any viable plan to service them, trouble recruiting fibre techs, splicing faults rates in many areas costing more to return and rectify than install,…

            NBNCo was disfunctional by the time new management was appointed. Contractor relationships destroyed to such a level many had downed tools. The company’s (built from scratch with billions of gifted taxpayers’ money) 3500 employees were more than weekly premises passed, and monthly activations.

          • “What public information was released under Quigley?”

            I don’t need to give you a list. It’s all out there, some of which you use yourself.

            “No weekly progress, no quarterly financial updates.”

            Is this meant to illustrate a deficiency? By mentioning two metrics that are released by the MTM while ignoring others?

            “deemed RFS could actually order a service (duh)”

            A situation that still continues today with Morrow. Can’t have been that bad, or are you planning on squealing about Morrow as well now?

            “e switch to the Orwellian construction commenced metric.”

            What is it about that metric that makes it “Orwellian” Richard, other than you trying to add hysterics to the equation?

            “The contractor mention doesn’t work with NBNCo anymore.”

            Then why’d you bring it up? In any case, not under Morrow’s watch … no. But that wasn’t the point. The point was you attempting to attribute contractor failures to Quigley/pre-election 2013 NBNCo, when it was the contractors and their subbies that failed. Some were even penalised for it, as you would expect (IMO all of those that failed should have had the book thrown at them, but there are subtleties of contractor relations that need to be considered).

            “NBNCo’s targets aren’t “meagre”, aggressive but realistic”

            Maybe you could explain this then:

            “The snapshot says NBN Co has achieved 29,005 fibre-to-the-node “construction completions”, while noting its internally budgeted target for this period was more than three times this at 94,273.”

            http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/nbn-malcolm-turnbulls-faster-cheaper-rollout-falters-20160228-gn5l0s.html

            That and apparently everyone is supposed to get 25 Mbps by the end of this year. How’s that looking for us Richard?

            http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-27/nbn-speeds-promise-check/5543512

            “Quigley’s targets were delusional (pointed out at the time)”

            By critics such as yourself Richard. That didn’t make Quigley’s targets delusional. You’d have to be speaking from a position of authority to assess them as such. And you most certainly are not in that position.

            “If Quigley and the rest of his underperforming team weren’t pushed they should have been.”

            Another line of opinionated rhetoric. I’ve noticed this keeps getting worse as the posts roll on.

            “By Sep 2013 NBNCo wasn’t 6 months behind ”

            Sure it was, look it up. It was 9 months behind, but they managed to cut that back to 6 by election time.

            “they were hitting 15% of targets”

            Problems were expected early on, and stated so by Quigley. That was the point, so they could hit the accelerator pedal later. I’m not sure he foresaw the extent of the problems he experienced (particularly the 9 month Telstra negotiation delay) but that’s what happens when rubber meets the road.

            ” ramp-up was non-existent ”

            That’s actually correct … because Malcolm Turnbull hit the pause button after the Coalition took power. You’re blaming the wrong guy for that one.

            “trouble recruiting fibre techs, splicing faults rates in many areas costing more to return and rectify than install,…”

            Not NBNCo’s problem. That’s the contractor’s issue. Precisely what I was talking about before.

            “NBNCo was disfunctional by the time new management was appointed”

            I don’t recall anybody but the Coalition stating so at the time. However, I do look forward to your criticism of the current NBNCo’s dysfunction, particularly the HFC Operation Clusterf*ck, call so internally by their own staff.

            “Contractor relationships destroyed to such a level many had downed tools. ”

            They only had themselves to blame for that one.

            “(built from scratch with billions of gifted taxpayers’ money) ”

            “gifted taxpayers money”? Hardly. The idea was that NBNCo pays it back Richard. Oh hang on, you just wanted to add hysterics again.

            “3500 employees were more than weekly premises passed, and monthly activations.”

            And you finish it off with an old Coalition rhetoric trope from before the 2013 election.

            I’ll say the same thing about it now that I did then ….

            “You do know what the term ramp up means, right?”

            A ramp up that wasn’t allowed after Malcolm Turnbull hit the pause on the rollout after the 2013 election, and drastically scaled back the FTTH rollout in tune with Abbott’s directive.

            I’m pretty sure you’re done in this piece Richard, because adding old election rhetoric, opinionated conclusions without consideration for the greater context (done on purpose I would imagine, but you wouldn’t admit to that), and selective analysis that only supports those conclusions just make for … and I’ve said this before … transparent fingerpainting that isn’t fooling anyone that’s followed the NBN for any length of time.

            See you at your next irrelevant to the Delimiter article, off topic post.

          • @m claims information demonstrating a Quigleys supposed “transparency” is “out there”, somewhere. Failed contractors selected by NBNCo not their fault (under Quigley nothing was). Random links that have no relevancy; surprising new tactic by the fiberartzi.

            Ramp-up for something as basic as pulling fibre (all third party sources) required more than 5yrs to get going?

            Claiming targets as delusional doesn’t make them so, however when every piece of actual performance data confirmed the massive underperformance does (when failed by 90% massive a fair description). Forecasts and actuals now available, it’s happened. In the past, done. Forecasts were destroyed by actuals. Like many here you fail to comprehend this basic difference; believes forecasts still have standing. (Rofl)

          • “claims information demonstrating a Quigleys supposed “transparency” is “out there”, somewhere.”

            Because you’re certainly apt at using Google to further your own narrative, you’re certainly skilled enough to find opposing number Richard. As I stated, it’s not hard to find.

            “Failed contractors selected by NBNCo not their fault ”

            If they fulfilled the tender conditions, but failed to meet then, then it certainly not their fault no. And penalties can apply (and did).

            “(under Quigley nothing was)”

            I would have thought that my previous two items where I considered NBNCo had failed would have dispelled that fiction Richard. You seem determined to hang onto it though. That’s not rational discussion, that’s just demonstrating one eyed partisanship at all costs. Point proved.

            “Random links that have no relevancy”

            You can’t follow a conversation? One which refutes your “agressive but realistic” point? That problem is yours Richard, not mine. The links are relevant.

            “Ramp-up for something as basic as pulling fibre”

            You do know that there’s a whole industry built around pulling cabl”, right Richard? I mean heck, if it was that easy, why does it exist at all. Why doesn’t everyone do their own? Why do we have standards? See how ridiculous your being?

            “5yrs to get going?”

            3 years actually. Lots of stuff needed to be put in place first. Or did you think one man was going to dig trenches and lay cable on his own? That a transit network, IT systems, business processes, design and the like are off the shelf items implemented the day after the company is formed? Surprisingly naive, Richard.

            “every piece”

            Every piece? Of course you can demonstrate that right? Or is it just every piece that you can find because of your selective Googling? I’d wager it’s the latter. It also means that I just need to provide one piece to refute that argument. So here you go:

            http://telsoc.org/event/national/2013-12-02/mike_quigley_reflects

            There’s lots of successes in there Richard.

            “Forecasts were destroyed by actuals.”

            In some cases, yes. But not all, and not overwhelmingly so. Particularly that a key performance equaliser/accelerator, a rollout ramp up, was never able to get going before the Coalition stomped on it.

            “Like many here you fail to comprehend this basic difference; believes forecasts still have standing”

            I understand them well enough. You however, fail to comprehend that any project will NEVER hit ALL of it’s targets, even if it does finish on time and on budget. Yet you’d like to fingerpaint failure when a 9 year rollout was not allowed to accelerate, without acknowledging essentials like company start up processes, staffing, IT systems and the like, and allowing for design and field testing, like any engineering project should.

            Can you comprehend this? Your posting history says you either don’t (not unusual for someone wishing to only focus on numbers on a balance sheet, rather than the unfolding outcomes those numbers represent), or you do and selectively ignore them because your demonstrated partisanship doesn’t allow you to acknowledge any element that might soften your criticism.

          • @m googling won’t help; it doesn’t exist. Progress data not weekly (rarely any), quarterly finacial not published, CPP updates nonexistent (all estimates).

            Choosing incompetent contractors the fault of tenderer. What penalties? Cost blowouts have been transferred to taxpayers.

            Cable pulling isn’t complicated. What experience do you have? Industry well established, challenges well understood in Australia and internationally. What additional insight has NBNCo added?

            Speaking of international examples why did others not experience the glacially slow ramp-up? Why have they been profitable every year?

            Quigley’s lists no successes in the areas that matter in such projects. They didn’t miss some rollout outcomes; they missed them all, and by miles. Quigley counts as his only successful outcomes starting a disfunctional company whose number of employees exceeded weekly premises passed and monthly activations; built wasting billions of taxpayers money.

            A joke, criticism entirely warranted. Soften it why? Because fiberartzi snowflakes can’t handle such failures being called out?

            Put up, link to Quigley’s transparent data published. Link to the company’s successes (not just throwing huge taxpayer sums). Compare to any of the dozens of superior performing international projects. Some of us (a few) post analysis of actuals because that is how all such projects are measured; not the vibe.

          • “@m googling won’t help; it doesn’t exist. ”

            Sure it does. You just have to get past the News Ltd garbage on the first few pages. I don’t think you would have got that far though.

            “Progress data not weekly (rarely any), quarterly finacial not published, CPP updates nonexistent (all estimates).”

            Just because the MTM uses different metrics doesn’t meant the previous ones didn’t exist Richard. Not a failure mate.

            “Choosing incompetent contractors the fault of tenderer.”

            Because they understated what they could do on a tender, then couldn’t deliver? That’s NBNCo’s fault? I could switch things around on you Richard. You accused me of thinking that nothing was NBNCo’s/Quigley’s fault. I’m stating that you’re the other extreme, you think everything NBNCo’s/Quigley’s fault. That has been plain ever since you started posting. Untrue, and … I state again … one eyed partisanry.

            “Cable pulling isn’t complicated. What experience do you have?”

            I could ask you the same question if you’re making that call. If you’d like to measure professional genitalia though, that’s not something I engage in.

            “What additional insight has NBNCo added?”

            Why do you think they had trial areas for FTTH and Wireless before they commenced the rollout? It was so they could take into account the most amount of environmental variables as they could, to enable the ramp up later.

            Funnily enough, Morrow has done the same thing with FTTN and HFC. So there was no reason for that as well? You going to call him out on the waste? No, didn’t think so.

            “Speaking of international examples why did others not experience the glacially slow ramp-up? Why have they been profitable every year?”

            Not sure, why don’t you tell me Richard? I like how you continue to add hysterical adjectives to keep the commentary emotional. Very instructive.

            “areas that matter ”

            You don’t get to dictate what “matters” Richard. You’re just going to have to live with it. He did.

            “They didn’t miss some rollout outcomes; they missed them all, and by miles”

            You really don’t read what I link you, do you?

            “disfunctional company whose number of employees exceeded weekly premises passed and monthly activations; built wasting billions of taxpayers money.”

            Can you please refrain from 2013 electioneering rhetoric? Not only is it untrue, it doesn’t get us anywhere. Repeating them like you do doesn’t make them any more credible than the first time you stated them.

            And if you’re wanting to call NBNCo’s dysfunctional, please let me know how employees calling HFC “Operation Clusterf*ck” scratches that critical itch for you.

            “Because fiberartzi snowflakes can’t handle such failures being called out?”

            And yet more hysterics from you. Perhaps you should examine your own emotional rhetoric in these posts before calling those that challenge you a “snowflake”.

            “Some of us (a few) post analysis of actuals because that is how all such projects are measured; not the vibe.”

            Richard, if you’re talking about the financial actuals, then no, that’s not how “all such projects are measured”, particularly engineering projects Project successes are measured by milestones, and not all of them are myopically financial. I’ve already linked you Quigley’s report on that. I’m sure you’ll call him a liar, but nobody is going to believe you over him, even his critics.

Comments are closed.