MTM NBN roadmap “tortuous”, says Budde

143

news NBN Co is taking “tortuous route” towards building its network with “band aid solutions” being applied via its multi-technology mix (MTM) approach, according to telecoms commentator Paul Budde.

Writing on his blog, Budde examines NBN Co’s approach to adopting, or considering adopting, new broadband technologies as they develop, rather than following what many consider a more ‘future-proof’ plan of deploying fibre to the premises (FTTP/FTTH).

In September 2016, he said, NBN Co expressed interest in a new technology known as XG.Fast – a level up from the G.Fast technology the firm had started to trial in 2015.

If adopted, XG.Fast will need fibre extended further, to the distribution point rather than the node as is currently being rolled out.

However, the development and deployment of these technologies is still in an “early phase”, Budde pointed out, saying, “in all reality nothing major is going to happen until after the completion of the current NBN 1.0 roll out which will not be before 2020”.

He asked: if these technologies are indeed reliably to be deployed to over 6 million homes, will they still result in affordable high-speed broadband services across Australia?

Further, will these “band aid solutions” be “better and cheaper” than the originally planned “do it once, do it good” fibre-to-the-premises approach?

While NBN Co revealed that it was conducting trials of G.Fast in late 2015, the firm acknowledged at the time it could still be two years before it is in a position to launch the tech commercially.

“By that time most of the developed world will have moved even further towards FTTH and in one way or another G.Fast will have to fit into that final picture,” Budde said.

There are technical issues brought by G.Fast technology too, he added. While these can be resolved, they only add to the complexity of NBN Co’s “already multi-technology mix”.

NBN Co is conducting further trials in 2016, this time in combination with XG.Fast.

While the firm expects to be ready for commercial launches in 2017, it could take “many years” to extend it across residential markets. It’s “basically another rollout, with all the associated costs attached,” Budde said.

G.Fast and XG.Fast will also require commercially priced hardware to make such a rollout cost-effective, said the telecoms consultant, predicting that it is “most likely” that the new tech will be a business broadband offering rather than a residential one.

Additionally, to deploy XG.Fast technology, NBN Co would need to drive fibre deeper into the network – beyond the node and to the edge of the premises/driveway using fibre to the distribution point (FTTdp).

The quality of the XG.Fast service will “depend heavily” on the quality of the copper cables, Budde said, meaning there will be no “ubiquitous speed guarantee”.

“In general what this means is that the telecoms operators will only deploy these technologies very selectively, in areas where it doesn’t yet make sense to roll out FTTH for either commercial or technical reasons,” he said.

While any new developments beyond FTTN are “very welcome”, he continued, as with all new technologies reliability and affordability will be key.

However, even if it is proved to work, XG.Fast “won’t eliminate” the need to replace the copper wires in the FTTN network in 10 to 15 years’ time.

Budde asked: “Why not do it right the first time with a proper FTTH network?”

“It looks as though we are doing it the long way round, going from DSL to FTTN then G.Fast, FTTdp followed by XG.Fast, and then most likely to FTTH,” he said.

Summing up, Budde said it would be “reasonable” for people to ask why the NBN rollout was carried out via this “tortuous route”.

Image credit: Paul Budde

143 COMMENTS

  1. Budde fails to acknowledge the “tortuous route” is the same adopted by nearly all telcos in almost all markets!

    “Why not do it right the first time with a proper FTTH network?”
    Simple, cost and time to deploy. Reusing existing infrastructure is cheaper and faster to deploy (where have we heard that before;-). Majority of revenue captured delivering speeds demanded by customers.

    Conroy’s “originally planned “do it once, do it good”” model failed terribly. As analysed (by two of us;-) actuals missed forecasts across the board (all metric) by miles. Quigley and board dumped.

    G.Fast likely to see deployment in FTTB and with FTTdp deployments for copper beyond 1km and in smaller regional areas (rather than FW or Sat). Quigley had zero answer for the above; either left without service (MDUs) or Sat.

    Budde has been bleating nothing “won’t eliminate” the need to replace the copper wires in the FTTN network in 10 to 15 years’ time for 10 to 15 years.

    Meanwhile others, having completed phase one upgrade, are moving to even higher speeds using the very technologies Budde dismisses:
    http://www.lightwaveonline.com/articles/2016/09/a1-to-pair-fttb-g-fast-in-graz.html

    NBNCo 30% complete, $20+b sunk. What could’ve been:-(

    • “Budde fails to acknowledge the “tortuous route” is the same adopted by nearly all telcos in almost all markets!”
      Incorrect.
      The same would be other telcos would have had to purchase a countries telecommunication infrastructure off a company. Any in mind?

      • @s Incorrect
        The same would be other Govts would have had to overbuild a countries telecommunication infrastructure whilst paying to retire existing infrastructure. Any in mind?

        • Other countries have a well established private competition market which infrastructure is owned not by one singular company.
          Dodging the question.
          and No, Australia’s private companies weren’t about to step in and spend billions and upgrade the infrastructure, I know you keep banging on about it, but alas it doesn’t make it true.

          • @s actually most countries’ telco landscape very similar (like Austria, Britain, Belgium, Canada, Eire, NZ, USA, …). The dominant telco engaged by their govts to deliver improved high-speed internet with regulatory support and comparatively tiny subsidies.

            Billions was spent to deliver telco infrastructure in Australia in profitable areas (vast majority) up until Conroy’s policy announcement, then zero.

            I know you keep banging on about it, but alas it doesn’t make it true.

          • Except all those countries you named didn’t have one dominant Telco who owned the infrastructure and if the government engaged Telstra to deliver improved high-speed internet with regulatory we all know Telstra wouldn’t play ball and would become the dominant player in the game leaving all other Telco’s in the same situation we have.

            No billions weren’t spent, we know this is your only argument that stands up against NBN Govt owned roll-out, and if it fell flat your house of cards would tumble down. Unfortunately you have convinced yourself that the private companies were upgrading Australia’s infrastructure while being no evidence of it, we’ll just let you keep that toy in your basket.

          • @s so the LLUB ADSL2 market didn’t exist (nor the dozens of their ISPs), nor dark fibre operators. Neither did last mile EoC or fibre markets. Not sure how we delivered these services. e.g. why did TPG pay $1.56 for iiNet? ;-)

            Trujillo was an impediment (long acknowledged), but had said adios prior to NBNCo being formed. Conroy didn’t re-enage; transfer of CAN and HFC assets for zero above what he paid to retire them demonstrates what could’ve been achieved.

            Successful upgrades in markets using the model discussed also don’t exist in the alternate reality. Quigley’s NBNCO performed great! (rofl)

            Unfortunately you have convinced yourself that the private companies weren’t upgrading Australia’s infrastructure ignoring the considerable evidence of it, we’ll just let you keep that toy in your basket.

          • Speaking about don’t exist…

            Wow, I wonder how Australia ever achieved anything, sans us all being Utopian L(l)ibertarians, who live in a 1950’s safety buuble and pick and choose their own so called reality?

            Apparently roads, schools, rail, hospitals etc and ironically even the copper network, were never actually built because cultists can’t accept that anyone but them could have built them.

            Unfortunately you cultists have convinced yourself (contrary to the facts) that private companies are the saviour (want the Greenspan sob story again…lol) but… we’ll just let you keep that doll in your dollhouse.

          • Look richard speaks another lie again

            “transfer of CAN and HFC assets for zero above what he paid to retire them demonstrates what could’ve been achieved.”

            At the cost of remediation the pits and ducts and asbestos for one or are you claiming Telstra going to pick up the tab for that when/if nbn starts rolling out fttdp lol

          • What is the remediation ‘tab’ Rizz?, we need to compare because you are speculating that the cost of remediation is so high that rolling out brownfields FTTP at a known cost of $4,400 per residence is the much cheaper option.

          • I am not your lover devoid.

            Btw what a detour I will respond to when you get back on topic

          • Oh so no figures then, you were only ‘speculating’, ok the MtM rolls on as is then.

            LOL

          • Yes alain…

            MTM moronically rolls on… like an out of control garbage truck…

            MTM of course = complete inferiority (with FTTP the admitted end goal anyway), obsolescence, those who roll it out even referred to it as FRAUDBAND, increased OPEX, costly add ons needed to exceed what we have with ADSL, costly remediation required, many tens of billions blown on the promised $29.5B, 4 years blown on the promise of to all by 2016, no cheaper/no faster, the whole shebang is a fuck-up beyond compare….

            As such anyone who lauds the MTM roll on is either…

            A. a complete moron
            B. a poor sorry political lackey
            C. all of the above

            I’d ask you which you are, but no need.

            You’re welcome

    • “Budde fails to acknowledge the “tortuous route” is the same adopted by nearly all telcos in almost all markets!”

      Note Richard, the ” nearly all telcos” you mentioned, are all incumbents, sweating their copper assets for the last drop.

      • @pg and why are they? Cost and speed of delivery, delivering speeds demanded… ;-)

        • Because it can be cheaper and faster. If you already own the assets and know how much it would cost to fix said asset you can work the cost over time and make a judgement to re-mediate over overbuild.

          However if you do not already own the asset, and don’t know how much work to re-mediate it then you are likely to make a mistake when making your cost projections.

          Its all moot anyway. The NBN is getting a hybrid architecture regardless on the technological merit of either solution. Bickering over it on online forums it a waste of time.

          Personally I just want the politicians to become accountable for claims they make in order to get into office. In this case my issue is the $29 billion, finished by 2016 (which had it been achieved would have been fine).

          • @s bickering over it on online forums and exposing others “knowledge” is fun.

            Personally I just want to expose the politicians’ fallacies and the widespread delusion that govt has any capability to deliver such services.

          • Yes it is…

            HC and I have been for years and still are, toying with the foolish …

            As such, would you like to (right on cue) finally explain how your cheaper/faster @ 25mbps for all Aussies by 2016 – $29.5B plan is going yet… or are you still avoiding the facts and trying to hide behind your fruitful, Richard is right because Richard said “anal”ysis…?

            Addendum: – before the paint even dried on my question you post a link to your BS as your proof, below… GOLD.

            I don’t know if it’s the ego, the audacity or the stupidity that takes the cake in such an approach, but it’s certainly original…

            But kudos, you actually finally got something right, it is great fun and look I’m having such fun, right now….

            You’re welcome

          • I thought so Richard…

            Just whimper off tail between legs again, sans any explanation whatsoever

            And then try to repair the H U G E battered and bruised ego (lol) by abusing those who don’t know your previous (as well as your more current) disproved and BS cultist claims.

            You’re welcome.

        • So Richard, with 3 years of change in policy, how is the increased multi part of the NBN going? Is that rollout speed increase you keep talking about actually occurred?

          Has NBN been transparent and released information as to the real world speeds achievable by FTTN? I can speak from supporting the product that there is massive variability in speeds being achieved on roughly similar copper lengths eg 1 customer getting close 60Mbs with around 550M of cable, while another on a slightly shorter run can’t get 45Mbs. Surely this kind of information would be good for the public debate?

          Would the outback be happy to have followed the Liberals and had NBN not build it’s own satellites but instead bough bandwidth from the private sector? I wonder what a semi monopoly supplier market would have done to pricing with such a huge demand surge?

          Are reports that copper remediation are running at 10 times what NBN forecast correct? If so how is that factored in to the cost difference to FTTP?

          How long are people going without internet access under the FTTP model compared to the FTTN? Prob the biggest advantage I saw with FTTP, as when my parents got signed up, was their RSP allowed them to maintain their ADSL connection to the end of their monthly payment which meant they had no down time as the NBN connection was activated and fortunately had no issues except for a truck hitting the aerial cable that came from the other side of the street into my parents house. They learned to run the cable a bit higher to increase road clearance and problem solved.

          Do you think NBN will release OPEX on FTTN and let us know if it’s running close to their budget? Surely there’s no real commercial in confidence related to this kind of info being provided to the public owners of NBN.

          • @j “Is that rollout speed increase you keep talking about actually occurred?”
            Yes:
            https://www.dropbox.com/s/2cpmjufh576l5ch/brownfields-actuals-v-forecast.pdf?dl=0

            “Has NBN been transparent and released information as to the real world speeds achievable by FTTN?”
            Discussed here:
            https://delimiter.com.au/2016/09/01/xg-fast-wont-obviate-need-copper-replacement-says-internet-australia/#comment-764527

            “Surely this kind of information would be good for the public debate?”
            Absolutely, the more data the better.

            “Would the outback be happy to have followed the Liberals and had NBN not build it’s own satellites but instead bough bandwidth from the private sector?”
            Not sure, but what if the subsidy was put out to open tender? What could’ve been achieved?

            “Are reports that copper remediation are running at 10 times what NBN forecast correct?”
            Morrow reports remediation is within their revised (leaked) forecasts (CPP remains the same in CP17).

            “How long are people going without internet access under the FTTP model compared to the FTTN?”
            Retirement time the same 18mths. Rollout much faster.

            “Do you think NBN will release OPEX on FTTN and let us know if it’s running close to their budget?”
            I certainly hope so.

          • Not sure, but what if the subsidy was put out to open tender? What could’ve been achieved?

            Probably another OPEL disaster…

          • LOL Richard hasnt increase now has it fttn RFS still slower than FTTP all they are doing is rolling out more at the same time which they could have easily done with fttp

          • @ Richard xgfast wont be of benefit to anyone connected to a node, unless your arguing that NBN can afford the additional cost of moving from FTTN to FTTdp?

            what does your dropbox graph represent? if it includes FTTP / FW / Sat then it’s not much proof of an increase in rollout due to MTM.

            Do you have any data to back your claims an open tender for Sat capacity was a vaiable alternative to build and own? From what I’ve read the current Satellites able to provide bandwidth to an Australian footprint was far less than what NBN are going to provide themselves, and it’s already forecast the NBN service will have to be heavily restricted in use.

            I think you misunderstood what I meant by outage when getting FTTN activated. Under FTTN your premise pair has to be migrated to connect to the node. This requires an outage. The records of how pillar to node and pillar to premise pairs map are non existent. Customers are reporting extended outages. In theory it should be a brief 15 minute outage, but in reality a lot of customers are experiencing outages of hours to days, some even in the weeks. This issue doesn’t occur with FTTP as there’s 2 separate networks running in tandem.

            So Morrow says remediation is within forecast range. Will be interesting to see if that holds as one of the big BIG issues with FTTN is that unlike with FTTP, which has active gear at the customer premises, so NBN know there’s a viable connection into the house, NBN have little idea as to what node to premises remediation will be required till a customer activate an FTTN service. Considering the current cost blow out from $60M to $600M was only for copper for the Pillar to the Node, there’s a pretty decent chance that NBN have under funded on pillar to premises copper as well. With such a small sample size of connected FTTN services it’s going to take another 12 months before we know.

            NBN have also underestimated the HFC remediation costs as well, shifting millions more onto FTTN. The value of reusing the HFC networks seems to be devaluing by the day.

            So why do you think NBN are not releasing any data around the running costs of FTTN, or the sync speeds achieved at various cable lengths? Admittedly the sample size is relatively small, but should be large enough to start providing a reasonable understanding for voter shareholders.

          • @j “xgfast wont be of benefit to anyone connected to a node…”
            No but is to those in a FTTN service area but beyond ~1km copper length required for SOE’s min 25mbps.

            “what does your dropbox graph represent?”
            As titled “Brownfields Rollout Actual vs Forecast”

            “From what I’ve read the current Satellites able to provide bandwidth to an Australian footprint was far less than what NBN are going to provide themselves…”
            Additional SAT capacity was required. Many private operators would’ve been attracted to available subsidies (as historically).

            “Under FTTN your premise pair has to be migrated to connect to the node…Customers are reporting extended outages.”
            Actually a two-stage process (ala BT Openreach). First patch node to pillar (existing exchange copper remains; pairs compressed), second patch to node when activated (remove exchange copper; unlike Openreach).
            Extended outages are occurring at both stages due to failures of process. Other failures are experienced across all techs including FTTP (eg damaging copper). NBNCo isn’t good at much.

            “BIG issues with FTTN is that unlike with FTTP, which has active gear at the customer premises, so NBN know there’s a viable connection into the house, NBN have little idea as to what node to premises remediation will be required till a customer activate an FTTN service.”
            Actually the same; both have active end-points just using different layer-1. The quality of either mediums requires testing; FTTH fibre failure rates over 20% in some areas under Quigley.

            The difference (and saving) is with the existing copper they don’t test before connection. Only if line problems are identified do you begin remediation. Reports from NBNCo is substantial remediation hasn’t been required.

            “Considering the current cost blow out from $60M to $600M was only for copper for the Pillar to the Node, there’s a pretty decent chance that NBN have under funded on pillar to premises copper as well.”
            Doesn’t make sense. Pillar to premises remediation was originally estimated to be $2685 per node, later revised (leak) to $26,115. Given 24,544 nodes the total increase represents ~$575m. The revised number used in CP16’s CPP 1600 + 700.

            “With such a small sample size of connected FTTN services it’s going to take another 12 months before we know.”
            And we watch with interest. The CPP figure is ridiculously large anyway, such the inefficiency of our GBE.

            “The value of reusing the HFC networks seems to be devaluing by the day.”
            True, but still half the CPP of FTTH.

            “So why do you think NBN are not releasing any data around the running costs of FTTN, or the sync speeds achieved at various cable lengths?”
            Because, like most govt operations, they treat taxpayers and our money with contempt. They should publish far more data than they do (I’ve be calling for the same for years). Taxpayers will lose tens of billions on this policy folly alone.

          • @Richard “https://www.dropbox.com/s/2cpmjufh576l5ch/brownfields-actuals-v-forecast.pdf?dl=0”

            Do you happen to have the spreadsheet or data table for this chart you compiled together.

            If possible a data breakdown and source of the data. :)

          • @d The main source of the data is NBNCo’s Weekly Progress Reports. Weekly data is available from 30jun2013, prior to that date I used progress numbers from the company’s Annual Reports (AR).

            Quigley & Morrow’s forecasts are from their Corporate Plans (CP), CP12-15p36 & CP16p60 respectively.

    • “having completed phase one upgrade” is the key point here. This hasn’t happened in Australia, most of our competitor nations are well ahead in this regard and have now moved on to FTTP, we had an opportunity to skip ahead, save some money and time, and get ahead of the game, but the LNP threw it away.

      There were plenty of things they could have done to fix the rollout, pausing for 2 years, adding in complexity and ongoing expense, was probably the worst possible outcome.

      • @d few competitor nations (the odd city-state) have moved to FTTP beyond high value areas, none ubiquitously.

        “There were plenty of things they could have done to fix the rollout…”
        Such as?

        FTTH is well understood. Every operator acknowledges entering premises is expensive and labor intensive. This was pointed out before NBNCo began to squealing, foul-mouthed abuse.

        Actuals showing demand for gigabit last mile speeds insufficient to recover costs. NBNCo’s 1.09mbps provisioned CVC per customer highlights the folly of even talking about higher AVC speeds. Add backhaul & IXP couldn’t handle them and the comedy is complete.

        • They could have removed speed tiers. Just pay for what you use. Also fixed CVC pricing and improved backhaul bandwidth.

          They could have rolled out to more profitable areas first once knowing how to do it to boost profits early on.

          They could have switched to FTTB for existing apartment buildings to increase roll-out speed and boost early profits. Then when raking in cash go back and negotiate with body corporates to install lfull fibre.

          I’m no fan of the MTM but to say labours plan was flawless is a bit of a stretch.

        • @b sensible suggestions post NBNCo. Removing AVC tiers or reducing CVC unlikely to improve rollout (CPP or speed), the later devastating to their IRR. Backhaul outside NBN.

          Entering premises is expensive and time consuming. Fibre skills in short supply restricting scale.

          FTTB a no brainer, even Quigley supportive (Conroy overruled). Issue servicing MDUs known from HFC rollout (they bypassed them).

          However if we go back further what if a compentent minister re-engaged with the incoming Telstra’s CEO. Thodey had publicly announced his willingness to work with the govt (as BT had done a few years earlier after a change in their confrontational management).

          Telstra was, and remains the only Australian telco with the resources to undertake a project of this size. Conroy’s arrogance in sidelining them was breathtaking.

          Conroy was prepared to put $11+b on the table plus USO billions. Telstra separation (aka Openreach / Chorus) would’ve been an easy sell, changes to regulatory arrangements to ensure capped capex recovery in profitable market whilst providing a wholesale layer-2 service also unlikely to be challenged as Telstra CAN had already been opened up years (LLUB) and they were feeling the pain.

          Majority of premises serviced by FTTN would have been achieved at a CPP less than the money Conroy gifted to retire infrastructure and would be complete today.

          Regional areas would’ve required subsidy (same today). If not a continuation of the OPEL contract, and open re-tender required (aka UK, Eire, NZ,…). Newer copper technologies becoming available for these areas including long reach vdsl offfering significant benefit over LTE or (gasp) SAT.

          Regional backhaul improvement already covered with a regional backhaul program. Most existing exchanges (urban) were already connected with competitive dark fibre operators.

          Carrier conditions altered (& USO) to enforce a minimum speed. Talk of gigabit ridiculous (see 1.09mbps CVC).

          Above successfully executed in a number of markets.

          • Unbelievable that you actually believe this BS let alone repeat it at a forum of tech minded people…Dick.

            My goodness, you are living proof that the dinosaur is not extinct.

            You’re welcome.

          • Too many facts eh Fizz?, extremely awkward to respond to the facts rationally point by point.

            What to do? what you and your sock puppets always resort to when it gets awkward.

            Abuse.

          • Ah the desperation of appeasing the master… GOLD.

            Alain, facts and you are mutually opposite…

            Contradictions and you are peas in a pod. Would you like me to post more?

            Now that we have the obvious settled…

            If you’d like to actually try to address even 1 fact and a current (whoa) fact, instead of having to typically resort to, but they…lol… I’ll ask yet again (now about 30 times – for not 1 explanation, let alone a rational one).

            How could the cheaper/faster [sic] $29.5B MTM – 25mbps to all Aussies by 2016, have blown out so massively in cost and time?

            It’s not a trick or leading question.

            So unlike years ago when HC asked you a simple question so that you could clarify your claims and you refused to answer because it was in your words a “leading question” ROFL (in other words you couldn’t answer and had NFI how to squirm out of your lies), this is what’s happening now and I’d simply like to know how anyone can continue to support this MTM debacle…

            Unless of course…
            A, B, C

            GO

            Feel free to start your fairy tale with, once upon a time… “before roads… there were no roads”… GOLDEN stupidity and unlike the comedy channel, it doesn’t cost a cent… Sorry Rupey.

            You’re welcome

          • @real again it’s all they have.

            In actual news Eir (formerly Eircom) announced they’ve passed 1.6m (villages with more than 900) premises at the end of June 2016 with their superfast broadband open-access FTTC network that began in late 2012.

            The project completed on-budget and 6 months ahead of schedule!

            Work continues on expanding their network to 1.9m premises by 2020 utilising targeted National Broadband Plan subsidies.

            Last year’s EBITDA was up 5% to €505m.

            Of course the strategy I outlined above would never work, just ask the “tech minded”;-)

          • The dodge, weave sisters…

            Avoiding my question for the 31st time…ROFL

            Going for 32…

            How could the cheaper/faster [sic] $29.5B MTM – 25mbps to all Aussies by 2016, have blown out so massively in cost and time?

            Awaiting A G A I N…

            You’re weclome

          • That’s all redundant, you keep living in the past, cost estimates and deployment schedules revised after SR 13, yep that’s 2013.

            Since then we have had CP 16 and CP 17, time to take down your framed 2010 pics of Conroy and Quigley and flog them on Ebay, you should get a few bucks for the frames.

          • Wrong

            That’s an excuse, I asked for an answer.

            …but you know that or you simply don’t speak/understand English or maybe you just don’t understand anything, which would actually add up perfectly?

            Do you understand anything or speak English MF?

            TRY AGAIN

            “How could the cheaper/faster [sic] $29.5B MTM – 25mbps to all Aussies by 2016, have blown out so massively in cost and time?”

            And don’t forget your former position of “no revisions allowed”… in fact you actually ridiculed such revisions…

            https://delimiter.com.au/2011/12/29/nbn-policy-should-integrate-fttn-hfc-budde/#comment-287691

            Easy eh?

            Apology accepted

          • So they’ve got 10’s of $B’s and 4 year blow outs like our debacle copper relic based MTM too, alain?

            BTW – wanna try for 33?

            *sigh*

            You’re welcome

    • Richard (I’m the best of the best of the best… as I could have been commissioned to write the Coalition’s MTM, because it ticks all the boxes or – something equally ridiculous) ****e…

      Who only recently was finally lauding Budde because Budde actually said something positive (so that’s now 1% positive) about Richard’s shitty, retrograde debacle MTM plan, is back again bagging Budde and trying to desperately talk up his idiot plan, as Budde is again in 99% mode and calling MTM out, as the complete debacle it is…

      Keep trying, try hard… your continued desperation in trying to polish your MTM turd, as it oozes through your cultist fingers, is delicious in a weird sort of way.

      You’re welcome.

    • What could have been indeed. We could have had a world class FTTH network.

      But no our government decided to cut off its nose to spite its face. Stupid economic anarchist ideology at work.

      • @w by when and at what cost?
        NBNCO 4.5yrs to pass 236,158 premise (fttp & LTE). 51,660 activations! CPP actual double forecast. At Quigley’s peak deployment NBNCO had more employees than premises passed each week, more than activate each month. MDUs stuck at SC0, e.g. ~90% of South Perth premises unable to connect indefinitely. The reality of your “world class FTTH network” @8sep2013.

        Compare the performance with say BT in the same time period, or Ericom, Telekom Austria, Deutsche Telekom, Belgacom, Chorus NZ, Comcast, Charter, …

        • Are you one of these people that comes to a BBQ, picks up the tongs just as the food is ready and then claims to have cooked for everyone ?

          Because building the nbn was now about :
          day 1 – started digging up Mrs Smiths driveway, laid fibre ….

          the company had to be built, the personal hired, the backhaul network designed and then the ACCC gave Telstra a gift by adding over 100 unnecessary POIs, so back haul redesign, and implemented. Before any roll out occurred, but when roll out did occur it ramped up quickly, right around election time roll out was ramping up nicely.

          Since then the mtm policy came in and now 3 years later I guess you would expect that it had completely overtaken FTTP ??
          not quite, so its faster right, but nto as fast as fttp ? 2 million fttp properties passed, and what is it now ? still less than 700,000 fttn properties passed ?
          and that’s with 90 percent of the installers being taken off fttp to train up for fttn. lol I’m so glad the nbn is rolling out so fast now

          • @g Conroy (and his “experts”) choose the NBNCo model, Quigley et al prepared his forecasts. They failed to meet everyone of them by massive margins.

            Much fun was made of Conroy’s Telstra hubris, the outcome entirely predictable. Turns out Conroy and the team he assembled couldn’t run a telco (surprise; despite his zero business experience).

            How did the other operators mentions achieve such comparatively better results in the same time for much less money. A mystery it shall remain;-)

          • BS Richard…

            You are wrong again/still…

            And after stooping to Mats low of mentioning over and over, cherry picked less than 25mbps, you are also sounding more like your other lap dog mate everyday, bagging Quigley for not quite, not massively at all, meeting his own admitted “aggressive targets” (no good us not pushing the boundaries he said – what a novel thought) whilst you just today used Morrow’s revisions to remediation cost to excuse the blow out.

            But then I suppose a self funded retiree (no leaning for Dick…lol) such as your self, needs an income, so please keep up the good work ;)

            You’re welcome

          • @ Richard. So the Trnbull forecasts of 25Mbs to everyone country wide by the end of 2016 is????

          • gareth,

            not quite, so its faster right, but nto as fast as fttp ? 2 million fttp properties passed, and what is it now ? still less than 700,000 fttn properties passed ?

            The bit you left out and most FTTP vs FTTN comparisons do when you want to stack the speed of deployment argument in favour of FTTP is that FTTN was only commercially released September last year.

            Have another go at comparisons using the NBN FTTP commercial release start in 2010-11.

          • So the lover of Rizz when was fttp commercial release it wasn’t 2010-11.

            So you can’t claim Gareth got it wrong when you can’t even get it right lol

          • Lol home by the one in love with Rizz
            “Residents in the trial sites of Smithton, Scottsdale and Midway Point will”

            So going by your own standards once again when did the fttn trial start may 2014 lol

          • @ Richard…

            Jeff: “So the Turnbull forecasts of 25Mbs to everyone country wide by the end of 2016 is????”

            Dick: “Rubbish (I called back in 2013) then links to a Richard said comment in 2016…ROFL

            Just to reiterate… what YOU said many years ago Richard was…

            The Coalitions plan (which was, as we all know – 25mbps MTM @ $29.5B for all Aussies by 2016) was if if you had been commissioned to write it.

            The fact you now distance your self from the unmitigated fucking disaster, whilst understandable for one with an ego larger than a small planet, is a complete and absolute lie…

            You are a disgrace.

            You’re welcome

          • Jason K,

            The commercial release of FTTP is when the product is available for purchase from ISP’s, which is why I said 2010-11, the first ISP’s were selling to customers in 2010, it was well established as a commercial product in the first release sites by 2011.

            I noticed you avoided stating when you thought the first commercial release of FTTP took place, we know why, because 99% of your comments rely on grammar tricks and deliberate vagueness.

          • Lol so it’s not 2010 for first comet ail release now was it. Because you keep complaining fttn did start until last sept but then have been plenty of trials before that lol so when did isp’s selling to customers lol. Wasn’t sept last year.

            Grammar tricks and vagueness lol at least I stay on topic unlike you when caught out try and deflect to something else.

          • Own goal again Rizz, you really play the fall guy well.

            Too easy, at least make an effort.

          • Again devoid I am not the one you are in love with.

            How is it an own goal when going by your standards it was May 2014 when fttn started not sept 2015

        • Two words – “start up”.

          Shh let’s not let facts get in the way of a good old cherry pick…

          Apology accepted.

          • Sorry Gareth you post wasn’t showing when I posted… kudos for spelling it out in detail to those who disingenuously ignore…

            :)

          • Including the stacked FTTP vs FTTN comparison, yeah kudos for that because that’s how I (Rizz) and my sock puppet whoopee band do it.

            LOL

          • @ alain,

            What stacked comparison?

            You mean…

            FTTP being marginally behind schedule/on budget at sub $50B vs…

            MTM = complete inferiority (with FTTP the admitted end goal anyway), obsolescence, those who roll it out even referred to it as FRAUDBAND, increased OPEX, costly add ons needed to exceed what we have with ADSL, costly remediation required, many tens of billions blown on the promised $29.5B, 4 years blown on the promise of to all by 2016, no cheaper/no faster, the whole shebang is a fuck-up beyond compare….

            As such anyone who lauds the MTM and bags the previous FTTP is either…

            A. a complete moron
            B. a poor sorry political lackey
            C. all of the above

            I’d ask you which you are, but no need.

            You’re welcome

          • @Reals. Consider this: You’ve accused practically everyone as being a sock puppet .…… think carefully about this … maybe, just maybe you’re the only one in this conversation and you’ve actually been talking to yourself this whole time.

            Q? Have you actually been contributing to a lively debate on the NBN or are u actually in a delusion state bought about by not taking to your medication? Is Rizz the Master of illusion and sharp riposte or is he just an erratic spark in the dark spaces of your mind? Is Richard actually the Ultra Graph and Analyser Extraordinaire OR is he a small node shaped inkblot on your Rorschach test? Am I you?

            Think of me as you angry alter-ego, a sort of Liberal version of Morpheus (think Pyne in a trench coat and silly sunglasses … I’m a fixer, I’m here to fix things – I mean you’re a fixer you’re here to fix thinks aren’t you) ….. Take the copper pill Alain … the copper pill.

            Leave this website, return to your basket weaving and never return … and whatever u do don’t reply. You’ve been warned before about talking to yourself by the doctors – it’s one of the signs of madness (are your palms sweating or hairy?)….. You don’t want the needle or anal probe again do you?

        • Lies and misinformation as usual Richard. You have nothing to back that up.

          When asked for sources you obfuscate, redact and provide spreadsheets created by yourself.

          You are a liar and a cad.

          • “Lies and misinformation as usual Richard. You have nothing to back that up.”
            Err except the charts, numbers and analysis.

            “When asked for sources you obfuscate, redact and provide spreadsheets created by yourself.”
            When?
            Weekly progress numbers are from NBNCo’s published weekly progress numbers, I didn’t think that needed explaining;-)

            Sure I had to create the spreadsheets myself, sadly things don’t magically appear. We’d discuss your data but, like all the squealers, you provide none.

            You are a liar and a cad.

          • Where is Woolfe’s data, he dropped straight into the lazy school yard argument, abuse, he must have forgot it.

          • Lol Richard I have asked you for your previous graph but your too embarrassed to provide it now.

            Btw is the cp16 fttp labor original rollout I need another laugh again

          • Dick and little Dick..

            Umm no, we currently have the MTM which was promised to all Aussies by 2016 with speeds of 25mbps (not up to, iirc) and fully costed at $29.5B…

            As neither of you can explain why this isn’t occurring and can’t explain the horrific blow outs in cost and time… I will just take it that you both either know SFA or are ill-equipped to admit the MTM fuck-up, we predicted would be a fuck-up, is indeed a fuck-up of mammoth proportions, that frankly I didn’t even think they could fuck-up so badly…

            So girls, I have YET AGAIN asked for your clarification as to the MTM debacle… care to ever address what is occurring now?

            Or Richard, do you, as it seems, prefer in your twilight years to just basque in your own baseless, narcissistic self love and alain (lap dog), well enjoy sniffing around Dick’s self love?

            You’re welcome

          • Yep got all of that, still waiting on Woolfe’s data that counters Richards analysis, what’s up still on Page 1 of the Dummies Guide to Excel?

            LOL

          • Lol reality Richard already did the graph but doesn’t want to provde it anymore.

            Btw when did fttn trials start or is it one rule for fttp and another rule for mtm oh wait silly question

          • Indeed JK,

            Just like the CBA used to be Ricky’s go to doc…

            Until I pointed out that within the CBA they had actually ratified Quigley.

            Old Ricky then made up some lame excuse and has “literally” not even mentioned the CBA let alone tried to desperately pass it off as his smoking gun since…

            He now relies upon Richard says (ROFL) which wouldn’t even stand up in Wiki where citations at least, are required.

            CLASSIC

    • Richard, do you actually believe what you have just said there ?
      “Reusing existing infrastructure is cheaper and faster to deploy (where have we heard that before;-). ”
      Well the nbn was projected to cover 93% in FTTP at $44bn which blew out to $46bn and be done by 2020/21

      So now we change to using existing infrastructure to get it done sooner for cheaper .. but now its going to be done in 2020 and cost $56bn … how is that sooner or cheaper ? its clear that tis not ever going to be faster ?
      And now they want to put fibre all the way top the driveway and just not do the last 10-15 meters because its what ? just too expensive ?

      The nbn was founded on the premise that it would provide ubiquitous broadband access for the country to help push GDP, innovation and give our children the best possible infrastructure. The simple fact that due to fttn limitations it cant go past 100/40 speeds, many connections cannot achieve even that, so there is no way to generate greater revenue from the infrastructure than is possible right now. with fttp you can go to 200/100 then 400/200 then 800/400 then 1Gbps.500Mbps etc etc no infrastructure changes required, just each time a cash injection is nee4ded open up a new tier.

      • @g Quigley’s forecast were a fantasy; predicted when published (CPs) and called out as actuals became available (ARs). NBNCo couldn’t even complete the FTTH network within the total budget figure with the best CPP at scale! Then add LTE, Sat, Transit, cumulated losses to break-even, underperforming ARPU, …

        “And now they want to put fibre all the way top the driveway and just not do the last 10-15 meters because its what ? just too expensive ?”
        They don’t, and even if they did yes it’s too expensive (tens of billions).

        “The simple fact that due to fttn limitations it cant go past 100/40 speeds, many connections cannot achieve even that, so there is no way to generate greater revenue from the infrastructure than is possible right now.”
        Not a fact, not even close to true. Technology evolves (as tech discussed here). Actual customer demand isn’t close to the lowest speed tier (1.09mbps CVC). Plenty of scope for greater revenue capture.

        “with fttp you can go to 200/100 then 400/200 then 800/400 then 1Gbps.500Mbps”
        Right, but no one is taking up those speed. ACCC data shows 89 (yes eighty-nine) customers on speed tiers greater than 100mbps @30jun16.

        “no infrastructure changes required, just each time a cash injection is nee4ded open up a new tier.”
        Significant infrastructure change is required.

        I’m sorry you believed the “push GDP, innovation and give our children the best possible infrastructure” tosh. They also said an IRR 7.1%. You were deceived!

        • no one is buying nbn plans over 100Mbps because no one is offering them either, TPG have 400/400 fibre plans that get good take up but that’s not nbn, so it wont show on your nbn only has 80 customers over 100Mbps.

          “Not a fact, not even close to true. Technology evolves (as tech discussed here”

          it is true, Telstra came to a local business I do some work for and tried to seel them an nbn connection, I said they wanted to top tier 100/40, the Telstra rep said that they do not recommend going onto the top plan because they cant supply it over fttn. He said we would be lucky to get 50/20 and recommended I just go for the 25/5 plans.
          it cant achieve the initial tiers, it cant go anywhere from here, if you go for a 100/40 fttn connection right now and achieve 40/20 then that’s you done until they upgrade infrastructure, no more revenue from you, you will drop to a plan that makes sense and never consider moving because ther is nothing to move to. Eventualyl someone will offer you wireless for less and you will switch because you might as well and nbn will lose that revenue completely.

          Better broadband has universally shown to increase GDP every single place in the entire worlds where it has been measured. Ther eis a direct irrefutable correlation.
          and no to change a FTTP connection from 100Mbps/40 to say 200/100 requires no new hardware, the fibre is capable of a lot more than that as is the ntd ( 1Gbps ) passed 1Gbps speeds, there will need to be a new ntd and a similar upgrade at the other end of the fibre run in the poi, no new digging, just new modems at each end. to go faster with copper as nbn are saying themselves, they need to lay more fibre, closer to the home, and invest it new equipment, in new housings, in front of everyones house (fttdp) that’s significant infrastructure upgrades.

          • It’s really worse than you suggest. Since the telcos either won’t – or possibly can’t, because they have been ordered not to by NBN Co – disclose what access technology you will receive, why would they bother to even offer anything greater than 25/5? It’s most unlikely that more than a handful of FTTN subscribers will ever see anything exceeding 25/5 and no telco now wants to take a risk of being dragged through the courts for making a false statement about available speed. This means, of course, that those fortunate enough to be able to choose proper speed tiers – the lucky FTTP few – will also find their options are reduced and will all be put on the lowest possible speed plan by default. What a waste!

          • Lol Richard lab grade conditions they don’t even test the connection unless they get a complaint lol. Much like your of on report saying people getting 10% within the advertise speeds for inlyb20 premises lol

          • Nah timman just comming about Richard claim that nbn can deliver lab claim speeds over the can with out even testing to copper after they connect it.

          • Lol Richard I take it that your silence is that you have no citation to you hot air out your arse claim

          • Hey, Rizz, did you see that Chorus CPP for FttP has dropped to $1,700 – $1,770 ($1654-$1722AUD)?

            And that they are “Tracking to bottom of guidance range with $1,643 ($1598AUD) for 33,000 premises build complete in H1”?

            Have a read of this:

            http://www.aspecthuntley.com.au/asxdata/20160506/pdf/01738429.pdf

            Very interesting read. Makes you wonder why Australia is so magical that almost everything here is the opposite of New Zealand…

          • @tm Chorus is instructive; ignore Alex he does believe such projects happen.

            Chorus released their AR16 last week:
            https://www.chorus.co.nz/file/74511/242446.pdf

            The public / private partnership is part of the NZ’s Ultra-fast Broadband program (75% pop by 2020) with a Rural Broadband Initiative program to subsidise non-profitable areas (FTTN). UFB is 57% complete EFY16. Fibre take-up is 24% in UFB areas, leaking fixed-line customers to mobile data continues. Copper last mile continues deliver the vast majority (~85%) of data services on their network.

            Their customer profile similar to Australia’s; 80% of customers choosing 25/5mbps or less.

            Chorus identifies sustained bandwidth (not peak) as revenue potential due to video (heard this before;-)

            Unlike NBNCo Chorus’ CPPP is to the boundary (FY16 NZD$1,689). They complete drop on demand (CPPC +NZD1,009). And their pricing excludes layer-2 capex (no, not the light-to-bit part;-), a portion of which NBNCo includes.

            But the company has been profitable every year of upgrade.

            Whilst NBNCo performs comparatively poorly (to everyone) Chorus’ FTTP CPP don’t match your claimed $1,770.

          • “Their customer profile similar to Australia’s; 80% of customers choosing 25/5mbps or less.”

            Except its 54% on 100Mbps

          • Chorus’ FTTP CPP don’t match your claimed $1,770

            True, it was actually lower: $1,689, and the cost to connect was $1,009.

            Still, $2600 odd ( in aud) is vastly different to $4400…

            Oh, and it wasn’t “my” claim, it was from the “Chorus investor presentation and fact sheet”.

          • @TM you haven’t added layer-2 capex and your NBNCo number includes Conroy’s $700. FTTP (B) CPP ~NZD3000 v AUD3700

            As I said everyone does it better than our govt monoploy supplier. And the comparison much poorer today as NZD continues its run to parity with AUD.

            @jk even with the links he claims 54% on 100Mbps (80% 25/5 or less). Can’t use a spreadsheet plus innumerate.

            Chorus’ AR16p37 “Estimated useful lives” detail would be enlightening for the fiberartzi (if only they understood it):
            Copper cables: 10-30 years
            Fibre cables: 20 years
            Ducts and manholes: 50 years
            Cabinets: 5-14 years
            Property: 5-50 years
            Network electronics: 2-15 years
            Other: 2-10 years

          • Lol poor poor Richard can’t use a pdf

            “our UFB areas and more than 50% of mass market connections are on a 100Mbps service or better.”

          • Actually Richard, CP17 says it’s $4,411 for FttP.

            Making stuff up again I see…

          • @jk I believe you’re referring to this quote in full :
            “Fibre connections on our network have exceeded 180,000 and continue to grow rapidly with about 12,000 connections completed in June 2016. Fibre uptake increased from 14% to 24% in our UFB areas and more than 50% of mass market connections are on a 100Mbps service or better.”

            That’s “50% of mass market connections” (excludes many services) of 15% of their network. The fanboys are getting dumber:-(

            poor jk can’t use a pdf.

            @tm The $4,411 includes Conroy’s $700 line payment. You’re wrong (basic stuff). Expect his foul-mouthed abuse to return.

          • Yes you are getting dumber Richard as again you claim 80% only choosing 25Mbps when 54% in NZ are choosing 100Mbps consider that Isp there are offering 100Mbps as there base plan compared to ours at 25Mbps. But of course there isn’t a demand lol.

            But then as always no citation of your usual claim except a Richard said so. Come on you can use a pdf better than that not that have just have to scroll down the pages

          • Really TM…

            How about that…

            I bet the faithfully obedient will be in a flurry to spin and BS even more than usual if that is possible?

            Oh too late Ricky the dinosaur is already in damage mode…

            ROFL

          • @jk as posted you’re restricting your claim to a small subset of their customer base. Most don’t have GPON! (I get it, you don’t get it)

            Chorus GPON ISPs don’t pay CVC, so no penalty offering higher speeds. However they’ll have contention further into their networks.

            Because of the lack of demand for their fibre services Chorus continues to demand the Commerce Commission increase copper pricing to make fibre appear more attractive.

            (&alex with more nothing;-)

          • Lol another Richard I said so moment so where is this citation that NZ customers base where 80% is choosing 25Mbps or less. Oh that’s right blowing hot air out your arse again got it.

            A small subset really Dick but 20 user in the Ofcom report was good enough to claim fttn can deliver with 10% of the advertised speed. Oh I see one rule you you another rule for us.

            Lol again not citation “Because of the lack of demand for their fibre services Chorus continues to demand the Commerce Commission increase copper pricing to make fibre appear more attractive.”. Just more hot air out your arse again of a I Richard said so.

            Oh no cvc ahh that’s your excuse. And let’s say nbn solved the cvc issue and demands goes up. We can all point at you and laugh.

            Still waiting for those other citation of your other hot air out your arse claims

          • @ Dick…

            It’s delicious, you weaving and dodging because you cannot justify the MTM debacle… that you could have written…

            Not once have you even tried… now using Chorus as a diversion now …

            ROFL at the desperate dinosaur, on the brink of extinction…

            Enjoy these “again”

            https://delimiter.com.au/2016/09/07/mtm-nbn-roadmap-tortuous-says-budde/?replytocom=766169#comment-766298

            https://delimiter.com.au/2016/09/01/xg-fast-wont-obviate-need-copper-replacement-says-internet-australia/#comment-765394

            https://delimiter.com.au/2016/08/17/turnbulls-nbn-hardly-target-says-labor/#comment-760989

            https://delimiter.com.au/2016/09/01/xg-fast-wont-obviate-need-copper-replacement-says-internet-australia/#comment-765873

            You’re welcome

          • @jk we’ll try and put in in terms you understand.

            Jason sells 100 iPads, 20 of those with 3G, 50% of those with 64GB. Jason then claims 50% of customers buy iPad 3G 64GB.

            CVC isn’t an excuse, explaining why their (few) GPON users are sold higher AVC tiers.

            Chorus customer profile (total broadband users) similar to ours.

            That you think a reflective survey sample by ofcom is in anyway equivalent/relevant continues to expose your shallow understanding.

          • Lol Richard your abuse and bile quite amusing but you still fail to give a citation on your claim NZ has the same ratio as ours. But all we get is another I Richard I said so hot air out my arse lol

          • Lol Rizz it’s quite funny.

            I am just asking for one citation which he still hasn’t replied and then harps open an “I Richard I said so moment” lol

            He complains about sample size but he is happy to use a sample size of 20 for Ofcom so he can claim fttn can deliver speeds to within 10% of the 78Mbps

            Can’t wait for the next “I Richard I said so moment” lol had sample size had cvc had the hot air claim of uping prices on copper lol

          • Indeed JK…

            And I too – I’m simply asking for an explanation or even a legitimate opinion (no excuses, no BS, just a simple explanation) in relation to how the MTM could have blown the budget and time frames so massively.

            From $29.5B to (let’s go with the latest stab in the dark) as much as $54B

            For all by 2016 now 2020.

            And this, when reusing much of the infrastructure!

            As much as $24.5B in increased costs and 4 year delays!

            This isn’t something that should be ignored or flippantly excused…but that’s exactly what these people are doing.

            As such if those we are asking had any decency at all, and/or were minimally fair dinkum, they would at least be a little critical and want to know why too?

            And they’d have an opinion and explain why they continue to support the inferior MTM rather than (what would have been similarly priced FTTP) at these inflated costs and drawn out time frames, regardless.

            Or if they were actually decent human beings, they’d admit that we were either lied to or there’s complete mismanagement at play here, to have been sold such an inferior network with the trade off being – “substantially faster (to roll out) and substantially cheaper”.

            But MTM (particularly as a non-start up/reusing a large amount of the previous copper/HFC networks), is currently proving to be neither cheaper nor faster, even on a one on one comparison with FTTP….

            Let alone when factoring that all involved in the decision making processes all agree that FTTP is the end goal anyway and those end goal improvement costs and time frames need to be added too…

            Of course they also ignore the added benefits of FTTP, or argue against well know data as such.

            But instead they run, spin, lie, contradict, cherry-pick/omit figures, compare apples/oranges..even laud current aspects with MTM they derided previously derided with FTTP, etc, etc, etc

            It clearly tells a story about them as human beings and demonstrates their obvious steadfast reasons for commenting here and that reason is certainly not honourable.

        • @g Many operators offer fibre services to targeted markets (e.g. businesses).

          Many factors influence end-user internet performance. For FTTN connections the state and length of the copper a factor. However CVC actuals show an average contention ratio of 33:1 (1.09mbps). PoI backhaul likely the same as is IXP (not point over provisioning what can’t be utilised).

          You’d get much better performance on an 8/8mbps with 1:1 contention and QoS; comfortably deliverable over all NBNCo techs. You want a business grade connection, forget Telstra and speak with an RSP more attuned to your market.

          I’m not denying correlation between GDP and internet speeds; indeed a few of us have discussed the topic:
          http://delimiter.com.au/2015/08/21/criminal-myrepublic-ceo-mourns-loss-of-australias-marvellous-nbn-vision/#comment-696753
          https://delimiter.com.au/2015/09/16/analysts-expect-unchained-turnbull-to-return-nbn-to-fttp-model/#comment-701187

          As shown above last mile fibre is but one component of your connection. Upgrading the other component for say gigabit speeds also necessary and expensive (and why RSPs aren’t offering those products; little demand at the price required to cover costs).

          • @ Richard. You don’t quite understand how backhaul is / can be ordered. My company has done a deal where we get a 10G wavelength to every NBN POI. Upgrades are now a snap because of this excess backhaul capacity. NBN please upgrade CVC capacity to XXX. Change shappers on core equipment to match new CVC capacity. New capacity now available to customers.

            It’s amazing how cheap backhaul can be when you’re offering to buy 121 10G ports.

          • @j I understand. Yes it is in blocks. However no RSP provisions more than the block capacity that covers their expected demand. Backhaul is priced by capacity and distance. It’s not an insignificant cost when compared to revenue, RSP’s manage these expenses carefully.

            How’s your 10GE going to perform with 80k gigabit customers?

        • “Technology evolves (as tech discussed here).”

          Until deployed with great expense and time, it has no effect. Pointing to shadows.

          • @ Martin,

            I love the way he says “technology evolves”…

            Then post a lengthy comment lauding 1800’s copper.

            GOLDEN, contradictory stupidity, that each and every MTM supporter seems to be afflicted with.

            ROFL

    • @”Richard” Telstra’s dominance was and is the *problem*. It is well-known that Telstra held back on each advance to its network when it became available. Because of Telstra, we could only wave to them as their time came and went. Only because of the threat to Telstra from competitors, we advanced. Saying that everything was rosy before the NBN is a slap in the face to millions of ordinary Australians. Both major parties were and are weak and incompetent, but Telstra is far from being our saviour.

      “Meanwhile others, having completed phase one upgrade, are moving to even higher speeds using the very technologies Budde dismisses:
      http://www.lightwaveonline.com/articles/2016/09/a1-to-pair-fttb-g-fast-in-graz.html

      Then why are we only doing phase one upgrade now and over the next several years? That means the comparison fails. Oh, that’s right, we’re building the wrong network for phase two G.fast. The result is that we’re behind.

      Blaming the move to FTTP for the lack of ability to complete phase one means that you must also endorse the use of steam trains for Aurizon and Wirraways for the RAAF. Blaming the NBN for trying to get ahead of the game, to satisfy demand that is inevitable based on ACTUALS! of internet traffic alone, is against the interests of the country.

      • @mh who’s saying everything was rosy? Telstra, like all monopolies a problem. The three amigos a disaster. However I’m not sure why anyone believes replacing one monopoly with a govt one a good idea. Also it’s obvious Telstra is the only entity capable of an infrastructure deployment of this scale, a lesson very expensively discovered by Quigley et al.

        We’re 30% through phase one because of NBNCo! A monumental failure.

        • Well Richard what’s the difference between a vertical monopoly and a normal one eg Telstra vs nbn?

          Come on Richard your supposed to be smart

        • @Richard,

          You mean the 3 amigos who embodied, promoted and stood for “free market”…?

          So, err, everything you live and breathe for, were, like your disproved cult… “a disaster”

          Well yes indeed… my goodness I agree…of they were…

          Such cult idiocy, whether emanating from the amigos, Lehman’s Richard S Flud or our very own poor man’s Richard right here at Delimiter… was/is/and will continue to be… a disaster

          Wow you are finally grasping something other than the obvious.

          Well done Ricky.

        • “We’re 30% through phase one because of NBNCo! A monumental failure.” The change of govt had everything to do with it (I love the rollout actuals from September 2013 to January 2016), but Richard says we should deflect from said points to off-topic ones so no point to continuing.

          • @mh and yet the data doesn’t show what you claim, change of govt clearly marked.

            Rollout improvement from sept15 obvious. I wonder what happened at that time? (Rofl).

    • (Quigley and board dumped) more bullshit from Richard,
      Quigley resigned months before the 2013 election and most of the others quit as well.

      • They “resigned” the same way as they awarded themselves “performance bonuses” every year;-)

        • *sigh* cherry-picked info as usual Ricky…

          Quigley received an annual salary of $2m (and donated his first year to charity).

          Bonuses paid were (iirc) in the vicinity of $600K p.a but shared amongst the entire executive management team.

          CEO plus all bonuses paid – $2.6m p.a. Again MQ’s first year went to charity.

          Bill Morrow alone is on $3m p.a (incl. bonuses).

          But that’s ok, after all Bill does have the harder job of trying to roll out a ludicrous, shiitty network, which could have been written by a child cultist, has to deal with idiot 1950’s throwbacks who believe copper is good enough and then has to sell this disaster to the public (with a smile and as if he means it)…

          You’re welcome.

        • Quigley never accepted a bonus of any kind, although I can’t comment on the other board members.

        • Who cares!, the failed Labor NBN model has long gone into history, the Coalition NBN MtM model endorsed by the electorate twice now moves onto completion using the smarter cost effective approach that uses existing infrastructure for the same amount Labor was going to pay the infrastructure owners to have it shut down to try and help justify the expensive brownfields CPP FTTP overbuild.

          • AReality please be honest.

            “that uses existing infrastructure for the same amount Labor was going to pay the infrastructure owners to have it shut down..”

            You have ignored the remediation costs, which are in the billions. You ignore the fact that the pillar node copper remediation is some 10 times over budget. You ignore the info released that the Optus HFC network is not up to scratch and likely wont be used. You ignore the fact that HFC is now going to be millions of premises less than promised by Turnbull

            So far nothing the LibNuts have promised about the nbn has come to fruition.

          • (Who cares!) I care and so do millions of other Australians who have to foot the bill. Dishonesty is cancer of our society, out of the 21 known civilizations, 19 have died from decay within. You and Richard are a threat to our society, due to your blatant ignorance, arrogance, self-interest and stupidly.

          • Jeff,

            You have ignored the remediation costs, which are in the billions.

            So have you, other than stating feel good generic waffle about billions, I could quite easily say using existing infrastructure for the NBN saves billions, so whose billions is less than the other?

            The billion dollar question.

            You ignore the fact that the pillar node copper remediation is some 10 times over budget.

            It is? so does that make a brownfields FTTP overbuild the cheaper option, I await your analysis?

            You ignore the info released that the Optus HFC network is not up to scratch and likely wont be used.

            BS, so why was the first NBN trial HFC test site in Redcliffe Qld with all the media attention because it was the first trial site using Optus HFC?

            You ignore the fact that HFC is now going to be millions of premises less than promised by Turnbull

            So? they are not infilling it with FTTP.

          • @ alain (reality… roflmfao)

            We’ll take that as a CLEAR NO THEN

            That you cannot ever be honest….

            But hey what’s new, we knew that.

            You’re welcome.

    • As usual you are clueless Richard.

      NBN is not a Telco like Telstra or Optus.

      NBN are a GBE being given $50 billion+ of taxpayer funds, to provide us with the best solution to meet our needs for the future.

      Relying on decades old copper for FTTN and HFC is not that solution and a giant waste of our money. The maintenance costs alone make it an idiotic decision and clearly only benefits Malcolm and his mates.

  2. Yep forget all the costs and time frames. So I am in an area 4hrs north of Brisbane. What if g.fast or xg.fast is deployed in Brisbane but I don’t have that option. Again…we will have this version of history repeating itself where there will be a divide. Thats the croc of s#$/ that gets on my nerve.

  3. they have eclipsed the fibre budget. They now want another $20 billion so $76 billion. More than FTTP. $26 billion to $76 billion. Then add Nokia’s scammy noise reduction technology and working out at the last minute there is no usable copper wires left and new copper has to be laid up to the property $90 billion.

  4. Budde is spot on as usual. Its an absolute waste of money to build out the infrastructure as NBN Co is doing. Turnbull banged on about how one of the best aspects of FTTN was that it is known technology and that’s part of what made it cheap. Now we have NBN Co hanging their hat on any shiny new technology that pops up in a desperate attempt to get higher speed services on copper. That is a very expensive way of doing things – it always costs more for brand new technology, and it costs more for the select group people trained to use it. It also introduces support issues for NBN Co , and beyond that, RSPs.
    NBN Co are also now whining that RSPs arent promoting high speed offerings to customers. NBN Co are clearly desperate to get the higher revenue that high speed offerings would allow, but again, FTTN is limiting that possibility. Turnbull and NBN Co were the ones who obfuscated FTTN failings at election time, trying to fool voters into believing that FTTN was as good as FTTP. Now they are whining when RSPs are doing the same thing.
    Turnbulls MTM just lurches from one disaster to another. If it werent for Labors FTTP, fixed wireless and satellite policy that was allowed to continue, Turnbull’s NBN Co would have nothing to show for 3 years of work. Not that we would ever know that because the level of openness and transparency is truly appalling.

  5. Budde fails to acknowledge the “tortuous route” is the same adopted by nearly all telcos in almost all markets!

    The govt failed to take note of that and ploughed ahead anyway.
    They could have seen already that other locations were already moving to fttp having already wasted time and money going down the “tortuous route”.
    Australia had an opportunity to skip that part and save ourselves the pain and cost (time and money wise) of this massive stuff up.
    Might have not only kept us up with the Jones’ but maybe even leap frogged them with an “easy” jump to higher than 1Gbps speeds once fttp had been rolled out.

  6. Sure hope the regulars here don’t have jobs, their poor employers watching them frantically typing away, little knowing it was all the endless circle of egotistical rantings on these forums…

  7. Richard clearly everyone here is wrong, and you are right.

    What fantasy world do you live in mate?

Comments are closed.